tv_sequence

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

Describes the lock behavior, step failure semantics for expect/wait, and the result format (verdict, elapsed time, result per step). This goes beyond the schema and provides useful behavioral context.

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 long but information-dense, with each sentence contributing to understanding. The step examples are structured and easy to parse, though a more compact summary could reduce verbosity.

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 complex sequence runner with no output schema, the description covers step types, failure behavior, output summary, and locking. Given the sibling tools list, it gives enough context to invoke correctly.

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 schema covers device and stopOnFail clearly, and the steps parameter is thoroughly explained with concrete object shapes and semantics. The description adds substantial meaning to the steps array, while the other parameters are already self-explanatory.

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 runs a sequence of steps in one call and produces a verdict, elapsed time, and per-step results. The detailed step format distinguishes it from the single-action sibling tools.

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 phrase 'Run a whole case body in ONE call' implies use for multi-step scenarios instead of invoking individual tools. It also references tv_wait_for for condition semantics, giving a clear tie-in to existing alternatives.

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