pause_product_feed_sftp_access

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the primary effect ('stop ingestion') but does not mention whether the action is reversible, what permissions are required, whether existing active sessions or credentials are affected, or what the result/response looks like. For a mutating operation this is a significant gap.

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 sentence, front-loads the action and resource, and contains no filler. It is concise without sacrificing the core purpose.

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 simple two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is minimally adequate, but it omits guidance about the optional ad_account_id and does not mention related next steps such as using activate_product_feed_sftp_access to resume. There is no request/response context, which leaves the tool not fully self-contained.

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 only 50%: feed_id is described in the schema, but ad_account_id has no schema description, and the tool description adds no parameter information at all. The description does not compensate for the undocumented ad_account_id parameter, so an agent is left without meaning for it.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Pause SFTP access for a product feed', with the clarifying parenthetical '(stop ingestion)' making the exact effect clear. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like activate_product_feed_sftp_access, get_product_feed_sftp_access, and other pause_* tools for different resources.

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 implies use when you need to halt SFTP ingestion for a product feed, but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives (e.g., activating to resume, or get to check current state). No exclusions or differentiating conditions are given, leaving usage largely to inference.

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