suspend_system

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so the description's added value is the immediacy and lack of confirmation, plus the RAM/sleep semantics (session preserved, machine goes down now). It stops short of noting that the call may not return normally or how the system resumes.

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?

Two short sentences, action front-loaded and the warning immediately after. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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 tool this is nearly sufficient, but an agent is left unsure whether the call returns a success result before suspending or hangs, and whether the destructive hint means unsaved state is at risk.

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 takes zero parameters and the description correctly says nothing about inputs. Baseline 4 applies since there is no parameter surface to explain.

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 and resource ("Suspend the system to RAM (sleep)"), making the exact effect unambiguous and clearly distinct from siblings like lock_screen, set_power_profile, or projector_sleep. It does not explicitly name a nearest-alternative, keeping it short of a 5.

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 warning "This will suspend your machine immediately" functions as an implicit cue that this should only be called on explicit user intent, but there is no stated when-to-use, no exclusions, and no mention of the gentler alternative (lock_screen) or preconditions such as unsaved work.

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