Pause or resume an agent schedule

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

Annotations declare a non-destructive mutation; the description earns credit by adding the actual effect ('stops future autonomous runs') and the state outcome ('without deleting the schedule', implying reversibility via resume). It stops short of saying whether an in-flight run is cancelled or what happens on an invalid/unknown id.

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 short sentences, zero filler, with the default mode and the non-destructive guarantee front-loaded ahead of the incidental detail.

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?

An output schema exists and annotations cover the safety profile, so return values need not be explained. For a two-param toggle the description is nearly complete, missing only edge-case behavior such as unknown ids or the fate of already-running invocations.

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 100% and 'enabled' already documents 'true to resume, false/omit to pause', so the description's parenthetical '(default)' is essentially redundant with the schema. Baseline 3 applies; no new syntax or format meaning is added.

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 pair (pause/resume) and a specific resource (Super Agent schedule) scoped by id. This is trivially separable from the sibling create_agent_schedule and list_agent_schedules, and the default behavior (pause) is stated up front.

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?

Usage is only implied: the phrase 'without deleting the schedule' suggests pausing is the softer alternative to deletion, but no sibling or alternative is named explicitly and no precondition (e.g. schedule must exist, must be yours) is given. An agent can infer when to use it, but the description doesn't route it.

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