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

Goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing the concrete effect of pausing, required owner/admin role, required Last Price credential scope, and the claimed-workspace restriction with a 403 for sandbox keys. This is exactly the kind of authorization and side-effect context an agent needs.

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?

Four tight sentences, front-loaded with the action, followed by behavioral effect, parameter source, and auth prerequisites. No wasted language.

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 two-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, side effects, parameter sourcing, role requirements, credential scope, and workspace-claim restrictions. Nothing material is missing.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented in the schema. The description reinforces connector_id provenance and the pause/resume meaning of active, but adds little beyond what the schema already states.

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?

States a specific verb pair ('Pause or resume') and a precise resource ('a linked store' / connector), making the operation immediately distinguishable from siblings like list_commerce_connectors, sync_commerce_connector, or create_commerce_connector.

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?

Explains the operational consequence of pausing ('skipped by the cycle and by execution') and points to list_commerce_connectors for the connector_id. It does not explicitly compare against alternatives such as sync_commerce_connector or disconnect, but the context for using it is clear.

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