get_currently_waiting_tasks

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

With readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, safety is already covered. The description adds context by specifying the DMV source and the result contents (SQL text, wait category), and clarifies the real-time nature, providing value beyond 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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that effectively communicates action, source, and key output. No information is wasted.

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?

For a simple read-only tool with one optional parameter and an output schema, the description adequately conveys the purpose and data source. It doesn't need to explain return values because an output schema exists.

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 fully documents the single optional database_name parameter with its default value, so the description does not need to add parameter details. The description also does not mention parameters, but the schema coverage is complete.

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 action: getting currently waiting tasks in real time, sourced from sys.dm_os_waiting_tasks, with SQL text and wait category. This is specific enough to distinguish from historical wait stats tools like get_wait_stats.

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 'right now — real-time view' implies this tool is for immediate, current wait information, but the description does not explicitly state when to prefer it over siblings like get_wait_stats or get_query_wait_stats, nor does it mention alternatives or exclusions.

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