pause_presto_engine

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only mentions 'pause' and 'state transition', but does not disclose any side effects, permissions needed, or whether the operation is reversible. For a mutation tool, this is insufficient.

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 concise with three sentences: a clear title, then structured Args and Returns. It is front-loaded and efficient, though the Args/Returns section is somewhat redundant with the schema.

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?

Given one parameter, no annotations, and an existing output schema, the description covers basic input and output. However, it lacks behavioral context like preconditions (engine must be running) and consequences, leaving gaps for safe usage.

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 description lists the parameter name (engine_id) in Args but adds no additional meaning beyond the schema's type string. Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description should compensate, but it does not provide format, examples, or constraints.

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 'Pause' and the resource 'running Presto engine', verb+resource is specific. It distinguishes from sibling tools like pause_prestissimo_engine and pause_spark_engine.

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 usage when there is a running Presto engine, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like pause_prestissimo_engine. No when-not-to-use or prerequisites are mentioned.

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