Wait for the worker's stage gate

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

No annotations provided, but description covers blocking behavior, timeout handling, auto-backoff, return phase:'running' on timeout (not failure), and typical turn length. Could mention side effects or idempotency, but core behavior is well explained.

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 dense paragraph with informal symbols (★, ;). It contains all necessary info but could be more structured and concise. Some details (e.g., '真实turn常20-30分钟') are useful but add length.

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?

No output schema, so description should detail return values. It only mentions timeout returns phase:'running', but not what a successful wait returns (presumably a settled phase). Also no error handling or status codes. Incomplete for a blocking tool.

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 is 67% (timeoutSec and intervalSec have descriptions). The tool description adds context on defaults and auto-backoff but does not clarify the 'tid' parameter, which lacks schema description. Parameter-related info is present but incomplete for required param.

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 the tool's purpose: blocking poll until the worker is 'settled' (stage gate), and positions it as the signal that the cheap model is done. It distinguishes from sibling tools like agent_stop.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance: it's the signal to read, default timeout 5400s, and what to do on timeout (check agent_read, decide to wait or stop+correct). States settled is the only stage-end signal, not nSteps.

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