cap_trade_confirm_wait

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses polling behavior and termination conditions, but lacks details on timeout handling, return value format, and potential side effects like blocking.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with core action, no redundancy. Every word is essential.

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 simple polling tool with 3 parameters and an output schema, the description covers core behavior. However, it could mention output schema or timeout defaults to be more 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 coverage is 0% and the description does not explain any parameters beyond the term 'timeout'. Parameter names are somewhat intuitive, but no additional meaning is provided.

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 the verb 'poll' and the resource 'confirmation endpoint', with explicit terminal conditions 'ACCEPTED/REJECTED or timeout'. It distinguishes from sibling 'cap_trade_confirm_get' by implying this is a blocking polling variant.

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 explains when to use (to wait for confirmation), but does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives like cap_trade_confirm_get for one-shot queries.

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