dolphin_execution

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral disclosure. It simply lists actions and does not warn about destructive operations (terminate, restart), side effects, permissions, reversibility, or how timeoutMs and awaitState affect behavior.

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, front-loaded sentence that lists the tool's actions without waste. It is appropriately sized for the high-level purpose, though the brevity contributes to gaps elsewhere.

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 an execution-control tool with destructive actions, no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is far too thin. It does not explain parameter behavior, return values, side effects, or safe usage conditions, leaving the agent without enough context to invoke it correctly.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must explain the four parameters. It partially maps the required action parameter by naming several commands, but ignores timeoutMs, awaitState, and granularity entirely, leaving most parameter semantics undocumented.

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 specific verbs (pause, continue, step, restart, terminate, inspect) and a clear resource (Dolphin's PPC execution state). It distinguishes from most siblings by focusing on execution control, though it does not explicitly name an alternative tool or clarify overlap with status or breakpoints.

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 the tool is for controlling execution but gives no when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or alternatives. An agent must infer that this is the right tool for execution state changes versus other Dolphin siblings like status or start.

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