pause

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

The description does not disclose behavioral details beyond the basic pause action. It fails to mention side effects, reversibility, or state prerequisites (e.g., whether the debugger must be running). With no annotations, the description carries full burden, which is insufficient.

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 with no unnecessary words, fully front-loaded, and clearly communicates the core action.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (no params, no output schema), the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks context on when the pause occurs (immediate vs next breakpoint) and does not explain the debugger thread behavior, leaving some ambiguity.

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?

The input schema has no parameters (100% coverage), so the description adds no parameter information. According to the rubric, for tools with 0 parameters, baseline is 4, which is appropriate here.

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 'Pause script execution in the debugger thread,' specifying the verb and resource. It is distinct from sibling tools like resume and step commands, which perform different actions.

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?

While no explicit when/when-not guidance is provided, the context of debugging and sibling tools (resume, step) makes it clear that this tool is used to pause execution. A slightly higher score would require explicit alternatives or prerequisites.

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