set_buy_order_stateStart or pause a popunder buy order by setting its state to active or paused. Use active to resume buying traffic and spending balance; use paused to stop it.
Start (active) or pause (paused) a popunder buy order. Starting it resumes buying traffic and spending balance.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Popunder buy order ID (hex `id` or numeric `id_numeric`) | |
| state | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare this as destructive, idempotent, and open-world, but the description adds important business context: starting the order resumes buying traffic and spending balance. This clarifies the financial consequence beyond what the safety annotations alone convey.
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?
Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and followed by a high-value consequence. Every sentence earns its place and 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 two-parameter mutation tool with annotations covering safety and idempotency, the description supplies the key operational effect of starting an order. It does not explain the return value, but no output schema exists, and the remaining omission—explicit pause behavior—is strongly implied.
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 50%, with id documented in the schema but state enum values lacking descriptions. The description compensates by mapping active to start and paused to pause, but it adds no meaning for the id parameter beyond what the schema already provides.
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 a specific verb and resource: start or pause a popunder buy order. It distinguishes itself from sibling state setter set_rtb_feed_state by scoping to buy orders, and clearly maps active to start and paused to pause.
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 by naming the two states and noting that starting resumes buying traffic and spending balance. However, it gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, no conditions for choosing start versus pause, and no alternatives or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.