Unpause VM

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the primary action and does not mention whether the operation waits for completion, what permissions are needed, whether it is reversible, or what side effects occur if the VM is already running. For a state-changing operation, this is a significant gap.

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?

One sentence with zero filler words. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity and states the core action immediately.

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?

The tool is simple (one optional parameter, no output schema), and the description gives the essential action. However, because there are no annotations and no output schema, the description leaves out behavioral details like result handling and failure modes, so it is only minimally complete for a state-changing tool.

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 input schema covers the single parameter 'vm' fully (100% coverage), including its type and meaning. The description adds no additional parameter-level information, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb ('Resume') and a clear resource ('a paused virtual machine'), so an agent can tell it is the inverse of vm_pause. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from related siblings such as vm_start or vm_suspend, but the state transition is clear enough.

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 'paused virtual machine' implicitly states the prerequisite state for use, which gives some context. However, it does not explicitly say when to use this tool over alternatives like vm_start or vm_suspend, nor does it describe what happens if the VM is not already paused.

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