pause_automation

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

With no annotations, the description fully carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains queue preservation, subscriber handling, reversibility, authentication, concurrency limits, and dry-run mode respect, leaving no significant behavioral gaps.

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 well-structured with front-loaded purpose, detailed behavior, and separate sections for args/returns. It is slightly verbose but each sentence adds value.

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?

Given the simple tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description covers all necessary context: what the tool does, behavior, auth, errors, and return format. No gaps remain.

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 single parameter 'automation_id' has 0% schema coverage, but the description adds meaningful details: a format example ('auto123') and a source hint ('Obtain from list_automations'), which far exceeds what the schema 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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Pause an automation workflow, stopping delivery while preserving the queue.' It uses specific verb ('pause') and resource ('automation workflow'), and distinguishes from siblings by referencing 'start_automation' for resuming.

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 provides context on when to use: it mentions behavior for new subscribers and reversibility. It notes error conditions (already paused or draft). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or provide direct alternatives beyond 'start_automation'.

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