wait_for_render

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It states the tool blocks and polls at an interval, which is key. However, it omits potential failure modes (e.g., timeout, infinite wait) and does not specify that it returns only when rendering finishes.

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 very concise, with the main purpose front-loaded in the first sentence, followed by a brief clarification and parameter detail. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.

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 tool's simplicity (one parameter, no annotations, output schema exists), the description is largely complete. It covers purpose, blocking behavior, and parameter. Minor omission: no mention of return value, but output schema likely covers that.

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 0%, so the description must fully explain the parameter. It does so effectively: 'poll_interval: Seconds between progress checks. Defaults to 2.0.' This adds meaning beyond the schema's type and default.

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 states the tool's action: 'Wait for all rendering to complete' and 'Blocks until no rendering is in progress.' It specifies the verb (wait), resource (rendering), and blocking nature, distinguishing it from siblings like 'start_render' or 'get_render_progress'.

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 after initiating rendering by stating it waits for completion and allows setting poll interval. It provides clear context but lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor alternatives like progress polling.

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