Poll buffered ticks

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, so description is not required to repeat safety. It adds behavioral context: 'Non-blocking' and the polling mechanism with sequence numbers, which enriches beyond annotations.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then usage instructions. No unnecessary words.

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 simplicity (3 optional params, no required, read-only), the description fully covers what an agent needs to know to use it correctly, including the polling pattern and non-blocking nature.

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 100% with parameter descriptions. The description adds operational meaning: explains the role of after_seq in polling and the default behavior when omitted, which supplements the schema.

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?

Name 'ws_poll' and title 'Poll buffered ticks' together with the description clearly state the tool reads buffered live frames. It distinguishes from sibling tools like ws_subscribe or ws_collect by focusing on reading data.

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?

Description provides clear usage pattern: omit after_seq for initial snapshot, then pass next_seq for subsequent polls. It also states 'Non-blocking', implying no waiting. However, it does not explicitly contrast with 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.