Rodar testes em modo watch

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It fails to mention that watch mode is a long-running process that blocks until interrupted, which is critical for an agent to avoid hanging. The description only mentions starting watch mode, not the lifecycle or side effects.

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 brief with two sentences, the first stating the core purpose and the second adding a generic development context. It's efficient, though the second sentence adds limited value and could be more specific.

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?

With no annotations and an output schema not detailed, the description carries the burden of context. It lacks key information about the tool's blocking behavior and how it relates to run_tests, making it incomplete for an agent to safely invoke.

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 only parameter 'framework' has a description in the schema with a default detection behavior, achieving 100% schema coverage. The tool description adds no additional parameter information, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage but doesn't enhance understanding.

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 'Inicia testes em watch mode (Jest, Vitest)', identifying the specific action (starting tests), the mode (watch), and the supported frameworks. This distinguishes it from sibling tool run_tests, which likely runs tests once.

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 phrase 'Útil para desenvolvimento' provides some context about when to use it, but it's vague and doesn't explicitly contrast with run_tests or other alternatives. No exclusions or specific scenarios are given, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name.

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