editor_unpause

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It explains the core action but does not mention edge cases like behavior when already unpaused, potential side effects, or whether it affects the runtime. This is minimal but adequate for a simple state-change tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, unambiguous sentence that presents the verb and object clearly. There is no wasted wording, making it highly concise and front-loaded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a zero-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description sufficiently explains the action. However, it lacks explicit differentiation from sibling tools like editor_debug_continue or runtime_resume, which would improve contextual completeness in a rich sibling environment.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool has zero parameters and the schema is empty, so there are no parameter semantics to document. Per the rubric baseline, 0 params merits a 4 since no description is needed for parameters.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('Resume') and the target resource ('the editor scene tree from pause'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like editor_pause (which pauses) and runtime_resume (which operates on the runtime, not the editor).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The phrase 'from pause' implies the tool is used when the editor scene tree is paused, providing a clear condition. However, there is no explicit mention of when not to use it or alternative tools such as runtime_resume or editor_debug_continue, so guidance is limited.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.