debugger_pause

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It effectively explains that the page is frozen while held, and importantly, that DevCDP auto-releases after maxPauseMs if not resumed, so no human intervention is needed. This reveals timeout and safety behavior beyond a simple 'pause' statement, which is valuable for an agent.

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?

The description is two sentences with no filler. The core action and purpose are front-loaded, and the auto-release behavior is stated efficiently. The colloquial reassurance about never having to press resume in Chrome adds helpful context without bloating the description.

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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is largely complete: it explains what happens, what the page state is, and how long the pause can last. It does not explicitly describe return values or mention sibling tools for earlier resume or stepping, but those are minor gaps given the tool's simplicity.

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 schema already documents this with an empty properties object, so there are no undocumented arguments. The description adds relevant context by mentioning maxPauseMs as a behavior, though it is not a parameter. This meets the baseline for parameterless tools.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Pause JavaScript execution at the next statement the page runs.' It also clarifies the holding behavior and distinguishes itself from other debugger tools by focusing on pausing rather than stepping, resuming, or evaluating. The phrase 'so you can inspect and step' makes the purpose concrete.

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 implies when to use this tool: when you want to freeze page execution to inspect or step through code. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, such as using debugger_set_breakpoint for a specific location or debugger_step_over after pausing. The guidance is clear enough but not exhaustive.

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