ugf_sui_wait_sponsor_bytes

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

No annotations, so description bears full burden. It discloses the wait behavior and base64 encoding but does not describe failure modes, timeouts, or idempotency. Partially transparent but incomplete.

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 sentences, no filler, front-loaded with purpose. Could be slightly improved by hinting at parameter roles, but still 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?

Provides workflow linkage but missing explanation of output (tx_bytes and sponsor_sig), error handling, and parameter semantics. Adequate but leaves gaps given no output schema or annotations.

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 0%; description does not explain any of the three parameters (digest, max_attempts, interval_ms). Agent must infer meaning from context. No added value beyond parameter names and types.

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?

Description clearly states the tool waits for UGF to prepare sponsor tx_bytes and signature, and distinguishes from sibling ugf_sui_execute_signed_block by specifying the next step after signing. Specific verb 'wait' and resource 'Sui sponsor tx_bytes + sponsor_sig'.

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 workflow context: agent signs locally then calls sibling. This gives implicit guidance on when to use this tool (before signing and execution) but lacks explicit when-not or alternatives.

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