pause_hl_copy_trade

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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, it discloses the exact resulting state (isActive=false), the no-op-if-already-paused behavior, the read-before-write step, and the critical side effect that copied positions stay open and will NOT follow trader exits with TP/SL left in place. It also enumerates failure modes (PAUSE_STATE_UNVERIFIED, PAUSE_UNSUPPORTED, COPY_TRADE_NOT_FOUND), which is far richer than the annotations alone.

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-loads the core action and the non-deletion distinction, then layers side effects and error codes. Dense but every clause carries actionable information; only the error-code list is slightly list-like.

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?

No output schema is present, and the description compensates by covering behavior, side effects, idempotency, and named error conditions. For a state-mutation tool, nothing an agent needs to invoke or interpret it correctly appears missing.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all five parameters including copyTradeId. The description adds the correct conceptual state (isActive=false) but no parameter-level detail beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 applies.

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 (Pause) and resource (HL perp copy trade), and explicitly contrasts with delete ('WITHOUT deleting it'). This distinguishes it from sibling resume_hl_copy_trade and delete_hl_copy_trade without requiring the agent to open either schema.

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?

Clearly establishes when to use it ('pause ... WITHOUT deleting'), and notes the idempotent read-first behavior. It does not explicitly name delete_hl_copy_trade as the alternative when a permanent stop is intended, so routing is implied rather than stated.

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