editPauseContract

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It identifies the action (edit) and lists editable fields, but omits side effects, permissions, idempotency, or whether the operation is destructive. Basic but not comprehensive.

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 sentences: the first states the purpose, the second gives usage guidance. No wasted words. Front-loaded with 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?

For a moderate tool with 6 parameters and no output schema, the description covers core usage well. However, it lacks return value information (e.g., what the response contains) and doesn't mention the internal __userContext parameter, leaving a small 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, baseline 3. The description adds context by tying parameters to user scenarios (e.g., 'end_date' as 'resume date', 'pause_phase_id' for disambiguation). This enhances the 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 explicitly states 'Edit an existing pause phase on a contract' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like 'pauseContract' and 'resumeContract' by referencing error-driven scenarios.

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?

Provides clear when-to-use scenarios: 'when resumeContract returns pause phase not found' and enumerates user intents (set resume date, shift start, change policy). Mentions the underlying endpoint (PATCH) for reference.

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