Pause tracked queries

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

Adds substantial context beyond the annotations: skipped checks are never made up later, an in-progress check is cancelled, failures surface in a "failed" field, budget is preserved while paused, and the operation is safe to retry. These details align with idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=true rather than contradicting them.

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?

Dense but front-loaded, leading with the action and scope before covering side effects, alternatives, failure reporting, and retry safety. Every clause adds material value and there is no filler.

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 mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers side effects, cancellation behavior, budget impact, error reporting, and retry safety. Combined with the annotations, an agent has everything needed to call it correctly.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It states the 100-item cap (duplicating maxItems) and references the "failed" result, but does not clarify the roles of organizationId/projectId or the expected ID format, leaving half the burden on the schema's bare names.

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?

States a specific verb ('Pause') and resource ('tracked queries') with an explicit cap of 100, and names the sibling operation that reverses it (resume_tracked_queries). An agent can distinguish it from delete_tracked_queries or set_tracked_query_check_frequency without opening the schema.

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?

Clearly indicates the alternative (resume_tracked_queries restarts them) and points to get_usage to observe the budget effect. It lacks an explicit 'do not use this if X' exclusion, but the context for when to pause versus resume is clear.

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