watch_until

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond the destructiveHint annotation by stating that the tool polls and is bounded by a timeout. It does not, however, explain any destructive side effects implied by the annotation, nor what happens after the timeout elapses, leaving the behavioral profile only partially transparent.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to conveying the action and termination behavior, making it appropriately concise.

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?

The tool has three required parameters with no schema-level descriptions, no output schema, and a destructiveHint annotation, yet the description does not explain parameter semantics, timeout outcomes, or return behavior. An agent would lack essential details needed to invoke the tool 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description needed to explain the parameters, but it only mentions a generic 'condition' and 'timeout.' It does not clarify the meaning of the kind enum values (text, uid, role, event), the format of value, or the units for timeout.

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 identifies the action ('poll the page') and the termination condition ('condition matches or the timeout elapses'). It is specific enough to convey the tool's core purpose, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like observe or wait_task.

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 description implies a usage context: use this when you need to wait for a page condition. However, it gives no explicit guidance about when to prefer this tool over alternatives, nor any when-not-to-use conditions or exclusions.

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