Pause browser automation for a set duration or until a specified element appears, so scripts can synchronize with React Native Web page state.
Wait for a specified time or for an element to appear
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| time | No | Time to wait in milliseconds | |
| findBy | No | How to find the element | |
| selector | No | CSS selector to wait for |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.0.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does not disclose whether the wait blocks the session, what happens on timeout (error vs silent return), or whether 'time' and 'findBy'/'selector' are mutually exclusive or combined.
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?
A single efficient sentence with the two modes front-loaded and zero filler. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool, though it could carry a little more without becoming bloated.
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 3-param tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the basic purpose but leaves the mode interaction and timeout/failure behavior unspecified. Adequate as a minimum, but not complete.
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 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters and the enum for findBy. The description only restates the two modes at a high level, adding no syntax or precedence details beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.
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 action (wait) with two clear modes: a duration or an element-appearance condition. No sibling tool competes with it in the set, so no differentiation is needed, but it doesn't describe its role in the broader flow.
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?
No guidance on when to use this versus simply issuing the next action, nor which mode (fixed time vs element wait) is preferable or how they interact. The agent must infer everything about applicability.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.