Pause a running OpenShift virtual machine to halt its operations without deleting it. Specify name and namespace to trigger a virtctl pause.
Pause a running VirtualMachine using virtctl.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | Yes | ||
| cluster | No | ||
| namespace | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure吠 but it only states the action and the virtctl mechanism. It does not describe what state the VM enters after pausing, whether the operation is reversible, or any side effects (e.g., compute is frozen, networking remains). No mention of unpause_virtual_machine as the inverse operation.
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 with no wasted words. It communicates the core action efficiently, though almost to a fault, since it omits any additional guidance or context that would make the definition more useful.
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?
The tool has three parameters and no annotations, and the description does not adequately compensate. It omits the meaning of 'cluster', does not mention the expected starting state beyond 'running', and does not provide any lifecycle context (e.g., how to resume with unpause_virtual_machine). The presence of an output schema is not enough to make the definition complete for an agent.
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 0% description coverage, and the description provides no parameter information. The parameters name, cluster, and namespace are left completely unexplained, especially the meaning of 'cluster' in a potentially multi-cluster context or any defaults. The agent must guess the parameter semantics.
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 ('Pause') and resource ('running VirtualMachine') and names the underlying tool (virtctl). It is clear about what the tool doesholistically, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like stop_virtual_machine or restart_virtual_machine beyond the action itself.
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 offers no guidance on when to choose pause over alternatives such as stop, restart, or unpause. It only implies a prerequisite by saying 'running', but does not explain the tradeoffs or ask the agent to consider unpause_virtual_machine as the complementary operation.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.