dd2_pause_state

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden; it implies a read-only state probe but never states that it is non-mutating or side-effect free. It does add useful behavioral context by decoding PauseType values, but omits what happens when the game is not paused or which apps can appear as pausers.

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?

It is short and front-loads the core question, but the text is malformed: a missing space runs 'app.PauseManager.PauseType' together into an ambiguous token, and the parenthetical enum note is appended without a clear connection to the reported values.

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 zero-parameter read tool with an output schema, the description covers what is reported and how to interpret a key enum value. Minor gaps remain, such as the meaning of 'by which app' when multiple pause sources exist, but the output schema carries the return shape.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the baseline for a parameterless tool applies. No parameter text is needed or missing.

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 names a specific resource and question: whether the game is paused and which app caused the pause. It is clearly a state-query tool, distinguishable from siblings like dd2_status or dd2_key by domain, though it never names a sibling explicitly.

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?

There is no when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative guidance. The only usage-adjacent help is the interpretation hint that PauseType 5 means the InGame pause menu, which is semantic decoding rather than invocation guidance.

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