wait

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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe non-mutating wait. The description adds one real behavioral detail beyond the annotation: the maximum duration is capped at 10 seconds. It says nothing about whether the wait blocks execution or what it returns, so the added value is modest.

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?

Very short and front-loaded: the purpose clause comes first, then the single parameter with its ceiling. The 'Args:' indented block is slightly awkward for a description but wastes no words.

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 one-parameter, non-mutating pause tool with readOnlyHint and no output schema, the description covers purpose, the parameter's meaning, and its cap. Nothing an agent needs to invoke this correctly is missing.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the parameter meaning — and it does, explaining the parameter is the wait duration and importantly disclosing the upper bound of 10. Unit (seconds) is conveyed by the parameter name, and the cap is the one non-obvious semantic an agent needs.

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?

States a clear verb (pause/wait) and scopes the use case to pages, apps, or downloads that need time to settle. An agent can distinguish this from action siblings like click or open_url, though no sibling is named as an alternative. Purpose is immediately graspable.

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 'for pages, apps or downloads that need a moment' implies when to reach for this tool, giving useful context. However, there is no explicit when-not guidance and no named alternative, so the routing logic must be inferred.

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