Watch Webhound Session

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive. The description adds value by explaining that 'done=true' is terminal and 'output_ready=true' alone may be intermediate, which provides behavioral context beyond the structured 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 efficient sentences that front-load the core purpose and then add immediate usage nuance. No wasted 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?

The description covers the essential return flags (done, output_ready) but does not mention other possible output fields. Given that an output schema exists (though not provided), the description could be more complete about the full response structure.

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 has 0% description coverage and the description does not explain the sole parameter 'session_id' (e.g., format, source). Since the description fails to compensate for the schema's lack of parameter documentation, this dimension is low.

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 it is an 'authoritative session watcher' and explains key flags (done, output_ready), making the purpose specific and understandable. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like webhound_wait or webhound_get_session, which may also monitor sessions.

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 provides explicit guidance on when to keep waiting (output_ready without done means intermediate) and when a user might request a partial update. This is helpful for correct usage, but it does not mention when to choose this tool over siblings.

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