pause_referral

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

The description adds substantial behavioral context beyond the annotations: it clarifies that payments continue to be recorded but earn nothing until the referral is resumed, and it explains the preview/confirmToken flow. This aligns with destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false without contradicting them.

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 two tight sentences with the main effect front-loaded and the confirmation procedure following immediately. There is no wasted text.

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 mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the important behavioral consequence, the confirmation requirement, and the preview/token return mechanism. An agent has enough information 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?

The description meaningfully explains confirm and confirmToken by tying them to the preview workflow, which goes beyond the schema text. referralId is not explicitly described, but its meaning is clear from the tool name and required-parameter status.

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 gives a specific verb and resource and explains the effect: pausing a referral means its payments are recorded but earn nothing until resumed. It is clear, though it does not explicitly distinguish the tool from nearby siblings such as void_referral or resume_referral.

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 explains the two-step confirmation workflow well, but it does not state when to choose pause_referral versus alternatives like void_referral or resume_referral. Usage is implied by the effect, not explicitly guided.

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