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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden and discloses key behavioral traits: existing data is preserved, no new contacts surface, and the operation is reversible. It does not mention side effects on currently running searches or idempotency, but the disclosed behavior is sufficient for a simple pause 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?

Three short sentences, with the core action first and no filler. Each sentence adds a distinct fact: what happens, what is preserved, and how to reverse it.

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 one-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description covers the essential behavior and reversion path. The main gap is the unexplained `id` parameter, which prevents a fully complete definition.

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 schema has zero description coverage for the single required `id` parameter, and the description does not explain what `id` refers to. An agent must infer from context that it is the signal search ID, which is plausible but not explicitly stated.

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 ('Pause') and the search-scoped effect ('no new contacts surface'), and it names the symmetric tool for reversion. However, 'Pause hunters' is internal jargon; without the title 'Pause a Signal Search', the resource would be ambiguous.

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 description gives clear context: this is a temporary pause that preserves existing data and stops new discovery, and it explicitly points to `sdr_resume_search` for reversing the action. It does not explicitly contrast with permanent alternatives like `sdr_delete_search`, so it stops short of a full when-not boundary.

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