deep_sleep_sandbox

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose real behavior: containers and network go down, data is retained, and 'the next request or start rebuilds it'. That recovery semantics is genuinely useful. It still omits auth/permission needs, idempotency, and effect on runtime state, keeping it short of a 5.

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?

Two compact lines, front-loaded with the action and its effect. The raw HTTP route is somewhat redundant with the tool name but is harmless and low-cost.

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 single-parameter mutation with no annotations or output schema, the description gives the essential state transition and rebuild behavior, which is what an agent needs to act. Only minor gaps remain (permissions, return value), so it is nearly complete for this complexity level.

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 coverage is 0% and the single 'name' property has no description. The HTTP path segment '{name}' weakly implies a sandbox identifier, but the description adds no format, source, or validation meaning beyond that, so it does not compensate for the coverage gap.

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?

Names a specific verb+resource ('Put a sandbox into deep sleep now') and the parenthetical clarifies the resulting state ('containers and network down, data kept'). However, it never distinguishes 'deep sleep' from the sibling sleep_sandbox, leaving the agent to infer the difference between the two.

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 word 'now' hints at immediate action but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or comparison to alternatives such as sleep_sandbox, archive_sandbox, or keep_sandbox_awake. The agent gets no guidance on why to pick deep sleep over a normal sleep.

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