terminal_events

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/non-destructive/openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: it blocks up to 20 seconds by default, returns early on events, and returns one complete queued capture batch with a separate image per captured screen. It does not mention rate limits or failure/empty-result behavior, keeping it short of a 5.

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?

Four dense sentences with no filler; the core purpose and invocation pattern are front-loaded, and each remaining sentence carries either a differentiation, a timing rule, or a return-shape detail.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description usefully describes the return shape (one queued capture batch, separate images per screen). Combined with the timing and non-screenshot clauses, it is nearly complete for a single-optional-parameter read tool, though empty/timeout behavior is left unstated.

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 description coverage is 100% and the waitSeconds description already covers default, range, and early-return behavior. The description's 'Omit waitSeconds for the normal 20-second wait; returns early on events' restates the schema rather than adding new semantics, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Read terminal events and actual images shared by the human') and explicitly differentiates from the sibling take_screenshot ('Does not take a screenshot'). An agent can identify the tool's role without opening the schema.

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?

Gives explicit invocation timing ('while waiting for ai_pending/approval and between actions') and shows the exact call form terminal_events({}). The when-to-use condition is concrete rather than implied.

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