Consume queued asynchronous DAP events or block until a specific named event arrives, with an optional timeout, to synchronize debugging workflows in Dolphin.
Drain queued asynchronous DAP events, or wait for one named event.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| waitFor | No | ||
| timeoutMs | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations, so the description bears full behavioral burden. It says 'drain queued' and 'wait for one named event' but doesn't explain blocking behavior, timeout handling, what happens when no event arrives, whether draining removes events from the queue, or concurrency semantics – all critical for an async event-consuming tool.
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?
Single sentence, front-loaded with the main verb, no filler. Appropriate length for a two-parameter tool, though the ambiguity of the two modes could have been clarified with one more sentence.
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 an async event tool with zero annotation coverage, 0% schema descriptions, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't clarify return shape, timeout behavior, queue semantics, or how this interacts with other dolphin_* calls.
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 compensate. It mentions waiting for a named event (corresponding to waitFor) but gives no format, case-sensitivity, or valid names; timeoutMs is never mentioned, leaving its default and max completely undocumented in prose.
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 specific verb and resource: drain DAP events and wait for named event. Clearly distinguishable from siblings like dolphin_request or dolphin_disconnect, though 'DAP events' assumes domain knowledge and doesn't mention the debugging context explicitly.
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?
Implied that you use this when you need to consume queued events or synchronize on a specific event. No explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives offered (e.g., when to use waitFor vs. polling).
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.