mame_pause

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses that the paused machine retains readable state, which is valuable. However, it omits other behavior such as whether inputs are ignored, if the pause is instantaneous, or how to resume. Minimal but not misleading.

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?

A single concise sentence with a parenthetical addition. It is front-loaded with the primary action and wastes no words. Perfectly sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 tool with no parameters and no output schema, this description sufficiently conveys the action and key implication (state remains readable). It is complete enough for its trivial complexity, though it could mention the associated resume tool.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the schema provides no semantics to clarify. The description doesn't need to explain parameters. Baseline of 4 is appropriate because there is nothing to add.

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 'Pause the live machine' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing this from siblings like mame_resume and mame_session_stop. The parenthetical 'state stays readable' further defines the purpose by contrasting with session termination.

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 context is clear: this tool pauses a live machine while keeping state readable. This implies a temporary halt versus stopping the session, though it does not explicitly name alternatives. The state-readability note gives a clear usage signal without formal exclusion wording.

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