waitForPause

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It discloses blocking behavior, user notification before blocking, and the fallback nature. It could mention timeout behavior or error cases, but the critical behavioral traits are covered.

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?

Every sentence serves a purpose: step label, blocking definition, notification behavior, same-turn constraint, and clear alternative. It is front-loaded and no filler is present.

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 annotations and no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage prerequisites, alternatives, and behavioral alerts. It is complete for an AI agent to decide when and how to invoke this tool.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description mentions a user notification which relates to actionHint, but does not add substantial meaning beyond the schema's own parameter descriptions. No additional param context is provided.

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 identifies the tool as a blocking call that waits for any debugger pause, listing specific pause types (breakpoint, debugger; statement, exception). It explicitly distinguishes from waitForSpecificPause by noting this is the fallback for unknown locations or non-specific breakpoints.

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 explicit when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance: must be called immediately after reloadPage() in the same turn, prefer waitForSpecificPause when file/line is known, and use this only when location is unknown or setBreakpoint lacks a specific line. Also warns not to end the turn before calling.

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