direct.hf.pause_ads

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses nothing. It does not explain that pausing is reversible, that dry_run/apply likely gate whether changes are committed, or what permissions are needed.

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 words with no waste to trim, but this is under-specification rather than conciseness. The single clause is front-loaded only in the sense that there is nothing else.

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?

A 7-parameter mutation wrapper with no annotations, no output schema, and only two partially documented parameters is not adequately described. Nothing tells the agent how to select ads or whether the call is a dry run by default.

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 description coverage is only 29% across 7 parameters, and the description compensates for none of it. Critical parameters (dry_run, apply, ad_ids vs campaign_id/campaign_name targeting) are left entirely unexplained.

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?

"Suspend ads" gives a specific verb and resource, so the basic action is inferable. However, the "Human-friendly:" prefix is filler, and nothing distinguishes this from siblings like direct.hf.resume_ads, direct.hf.archive_ads, or direct.hf.pause_campaigns.

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?

No when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, no mention of alternatives such as archive_ads or moderate_ads. The only hint is the "hf" wrapper naming convention, which the agent must infer from siblings rather than from this description.

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