Get Human Wait State

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. 'Check' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not clarify possible side effects, error behavior for invalid sessions, or how this relates to pause/resume states. It is minimally adequate but lacks depth.

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 of eight words, immediately stating the purpose. There is no redundant wording, and the structure is optimally front-loaded.

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 simple one-parameter query tool with an output schema, the description is reasonably complete. However, it omits any behavioral nuances such as what constitutes 'waiting for human action' (e.g., pending dialog, paused session) or how the returned state should be interpreted. The presence of an output schema mitigates some gaps, but the description alone is minimally sufficient.

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 one required parameter, sessionId, with 0% description coverage. The description does not add any meaning beyond the schema, such as expected format (e.g., UUID), where to obtain the session ID, or how it is used. Although the parameter name is self-explanatory, the description fails to compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 'Check if a session is waiting for human action' clearly states a specific action (check) and resource (session's human wait state). It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_session, pause_for_human, and resume_session by focusing specifically on the wait-state query.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_session or pause_for_human. It does not mention common workflows, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage context purely from the name.

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