pause_campaign

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that running steps finish but no new ones start. However, it omits details on resumability, permissions, or side effects. Still, the core behavior is transparent.

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 extremely concise with two sentences and an args section. No superfluous information; every word adds value. Well-structured.

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 tool with 1 parameter and an output schema, the description covers the essential behavior and parameter meaning. However, it could mention resumability or link to related tools like 'resume_campaign'. Still, fairly complete.

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%, but the description adds meaning by stating 'id: Campaign UUID', clarifying the parameter's purpose and type beyond the schema's minimal 'Id' label. This partially compensates for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 clearly states the action ('pause'), the resource ('campaign'), and the behavioral effect ('running steps finish but no new ones start'). It effectively distinguishes the tool from siblings like 'cancel_campaign' and 'resume_campaign'.

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?

Description implies usage for temporarily halting a campaign while allowing current steps to complete, but does not explicitly state when to use versus alternatives like 'cancel_campaign'. No direct mention of when-not or prerequisites.

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