watch_cell_outputs

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

Description omits key behavioral details: it does not disclose that polling is blocking until timeout, does not explain what happens when outputs don't change, and provides no information about side effects or limitations. With no annotations, the description should cover these aspects.

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?

Single sentence, no fluff. However, it is too brief for the complexity of the tool, sacrificing necessary detail for brevity.

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 no output schema, no annotations, and 5 parameters with no descriptions, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to explain return format, polling behavior, or parameter effects, making it insufficient for reliable agent use.

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?

Input schema has 5 parameters with 0% description coverage. The description does not explain any parameter (cellIds, timeoutSeconds, pollIntervalSeconds, maxBytes, normalize), leaving the agent without guidance on how to fill them correctly.

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?

Description clearly states the tool polls cell outputs and returns the latest outputs. Verb 'polls' and resource 'cell outputs' are specific. Distinguishes from similar tools like read_cell_outputs by implying continuous monitoring, though not explicitly contrasted.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as read_cell_outputs or wait_for_cells. The description lacks context about ideal use cases or conditions.

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