mgba_pause

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

Without annotations, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: it modifies run state, confirms all other tool calls still work, notes build-dependency with a capability check, and clarifies that calling pause when already paused is a no-op. This exceeds what annotations would typically provide.

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 labeled sections (PURPOSE, USAGE, BEHAVIOR, RETURNS), making it easy to scan. While every sentence adds value, there is a slight redundancy in explaining that memory reads/writes work regardless of pause state, which could be more concise. Still, it is efficient.

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 tool's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema), the description covers all necessary context: purpose, usage boundaries, behavioral implications, dependencies, error handling, and return value. The RETURNS line explicitly states the output 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 input schema has zero parameters, so the description does not need to elaborate on parameter semantics. The baseline for zero parameters is 4, and the description appropriately avoids adding unnecessary detail.

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 explicitly states 'PURPOSE: Pause emulation — freeze the game-logic clock and hold the current frame on screen.' The verb 'Pause' and resource 'emulation' are clear, and it distinguishes itself from siblings like mgba_unpause and mgba_advance_frames by explaining their differences.

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 USAGE section provides explicit when-to-use ('before a sequence of memory-inspect / write / screenshot calls') and when-not-to-use ('for one-shot reads it's optional') guidance. It also names alternatives: mgba_unpause for resuming and mgba_advance_frames for stepping frames without leaving pause.

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