Wait for manual UI login

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the behavior of waiting for a specified number of seconds and then capturing session tokens, adding a meaningful side effect beyond just waiting. However, it does not detail what 'capture session tokens' entails or how timeouts are handled, which prevents a perfect score.

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 that includes all essential information—what it does, when to use it, and the post-action—without any fluff. The parenthetical examples are concise and useful.

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 single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the main aspects: purpose (wait), trigger (manual action), and outcome (capture tokens). It lacks explicit timeout/failure behavior or return value details, but those are less critical for this tool's simplicity.

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?

The schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It does so by explaining 'a number of seconds', directly defining the sole parameter's meaning. While it does not mention the default or range (already in schema constraints), it adds essential semantic context that the raw integer type lacks.

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 uses a specific verb 'Wait' and references the resource 'seconds' and the context 'manual action in the visible browser' with concrete examples (Cloudflare challenge, 2FA, password manager). It also states a distinct post-action ('capture the session tokens'), which clearly distinguishes it from sibling browser tools like browser_click, browser_type, and browser_evaluate.

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 clearly indicates when to use the tool: when the user needs to finish a manual action in the browser, with specific scenarios listed. It does not explicitly mention alternatives, but no alternative wait tool exists among siblings, and the contrast with automated browser tools is implicit.

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