updown_paused

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 discloses that the tool is a read-only check and warns that writes will revert if paused. This is good behavioral context, though it could mention error handling or return type.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose and a critical consequence. No unnecessary words.

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 simple boolean check with one parameter and no output schema, the description provides essential behavioral context and distinguishes from siblings. However, it omits details like return format or what happens if the asset is not paused, but given the simplicity, it is largely sufficient.

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 schema has one parameter with 0% description coverage. The description does not mention the 'asset' parameter or its allowed values (enum). Since the schema lacks descriptions, the description should compensate but fails to add any parameter context beyond the tool name.

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 uses a specific verb 'Check' and clearly identifies the resource 'UPDOWN asset paused'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like updown_bet or updown_claim by focusing solely on the pause status.

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 explicitly states that 'writes will revert if true', which strongly implies using this tool before write operations. While it doesn't list alternative tools, it provides clear context for when to check this status.

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