wait

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

With no annotations, the description carries the whole burden and does disclose one important behavioral fact: the wait is capped at 30 s, signalling a blocking call. It does not say what happens if seconds exceeds 30 (clamp vs. error), nor whether it returns anything or simply blocks, which matters for an agent sequencing calls.

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?

One short sentence with the action first and the qualifying conditions immediately after; the 30 s cap is placed at the end where it reads as a constraint. No filler, nothing redundant.

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?

It is a one-parameter, side-effect-free utility with no output schema, so little is needed, and the description covers purpose, typical triggers, and the time bound. The main omission is the fixed-sleep vs. settle-detection semantics, which is the one thing an agent must know to choose between a 1 s and 10 s value.

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% and the single parameter has only a default of 1 and a title. The description's "Max 30 s" is the only added meaning, bounding the seconds value, but it leaves the core ambiguity unresolved: is seconds a fixed sleep, or an upper bound on waiting until settled? A caller cannot tell from either source.

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?

"Wait for the screen to settle" states a specific action plus the resource/condition it targets, and the parenthetical (app loading, animations) makes the intent concrete. It is clearly separable from every sibling (tap, screenshot, get_ui_elements), though it never explicitly names itself as the idle/sleep primitive among them.

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 parenthetical "app loading, animations" implies the two situations that call for it, which is better than nothing. But it gives no explicit rule such as "use after open_app/tap before screenshot" and no exclusion, e.g. when polling get_ui_elements would be preferable to a blind sleep.

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