runtime_freeze

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

There are no annotations, so the description must carry the full burden. However, it only restates the name's meaning without disclosing additional behaviors such as reversibility, side effects, or prerequisites. The phrase 'the running game' implies it only works when a game is running, but no further transparency is provided.

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 short sentence with no filler words. It is concise and front-loaded, conveying the essential function immediately.

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 simplicity of the tool (no params, no output schema), the description covers the core action sufficiently. However, it does not explain how it relates to runtime_resume or when the game is not running, but for a zero-param tool this is not a significant gap.

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 tool has zero parameters, which gives a baseline of 4. The description adds no parameter information because none exist, and no compensation is needed.

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 'Pause' with a clear resource 'the running game', and adds 'freeze' as a synonym. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like runtime_resume, runtime_step, and stop_project by clearly indicating its scope is pausing the game.

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 usage when you need to pause the running game, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or conditions. For a simple tool with no parameters, the implied usage is moderately clear, but lacks explicit when/when-not guidance.

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