rollout_pause

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true and non-idempotent, giving the safety profile. Description adds the useful dry_run preview path and the inverse relationship, though it doesn't say what happens to in-flight pods or reversibility beyond the inverse tool. Adds real value beyond annotations.

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?

Front-loaded write/risk tag, purpose, inverse, and dry-run note, followed by a compact Args block. Every line earns its place with zero padding.

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?

With no output schema and 0% schema coverage, the description must carry params and behavior; it does both reasonably well for a 4-param mutation tool. Minor gap: no explicit output/return info, though this is largely implied by the write semantics.

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 0%, so the description carries the full parameter burden. It documents all four params including namespace default behavior and dry_run semantics, which is essential given the schema has no descriptions. It's complete but terse; no syntax/format details for name or target.

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?

Specific verb+resource ('Pause a deployment's rollout') with the inverse named explicitly (rollout_resume), which clearly distinguishes it from siblings like rollout_resume and rollout_restart_deployment.

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?

Names the inverse tool and gives the dry_run preview path, which is clear guidance for when to preview vs act. Doesn't explicitly state when-not-to-use or prerequisites, but the inverse and dry-run hints cover the main routing decisions.

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