container_pause

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

Beyond annotations (mutation, non-destructive), the description details the mechanism (freezer cgroup), process suspension behavior, resource retention, CPU impact, and return value (`State.Paused true`). No contradiction with 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?

The description is well-structured with a clear opening, comparison, effects, and usage hint. It is reasonably concise, though the technical detail on cgroups could be simplified.

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?

The description covers behavior, return value, and important caveats (exec fails, resume needed). It does not explicitly mention prerequisites (e.g., container must be running) or idempotency, but for a simple tool it is largely complete.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description provides a basic explanation for the only parameter ('The container id or name'). It adds meaning but lacks format specifics or examples, so it's adequate but not thorough.

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 ('suspend all processes') and resource ('container'), and distinguishes itself from related tools like `container_unpause` and `container_exec`, providing specific behavioral comparisons.

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?

It contextualizes when to use pause (to freeze without process awareness, no CPU consumption) and mentions the counterpart `container_unpause` and the incompatibility with `container_exec`. However, it does not explicitly exclude alternatives like `container_stop`.

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