task_wait

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

In the absence of annotations, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: it blocks until completion or timeout, specifies timeout behavior (None waits indefinitely), polling interval, return values ('SUCCEEDED', 'FAILED' with reason), and exceptions ('GlobusError').

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 well-structured with clear sections (Args, Returns, Raises, Examples) and uses concise sentences. Every line adds value, avoiding redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's purpose (blocking wait with timeout), the description covers all necessary aspects: behavior, input parameters, output structure, error handling, and usage examples. It is complete for an agent to use 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 fully compensates by explaining each parameter: task_id as UUID, timeout as maximum seconds (default None), polling_interval as seconds between checks (default 1). Examples illustrate usage.

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 states 'Wait for a task to complete' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'task_cancel' and 'task_show' by focusing on the wait/blocking behavior.

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?

It advises using this tool when 'you need data in place before proceeding with subsequent operations', providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly exclude alternatives or mention when not to use it.

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