wait_for_batch

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses blocking behavior, timeout defaults/hard cap, return fields, and safety ('it can never hang'). Lacks only mention of side effects (assumed none), but covers key behavioral traits.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the main action (Block until...), then details on return value and timeout parameters. Every sentence is essential and no waste.

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 tool with 2 parameters and no nested objects or output schema, the description is thorough. It explains behavior, return value (same as get_batch_status plus additional fields), and timeout characteristics. No gaps.

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 100%, but description adds context: default timeout 300s, hard cap 600s, and clarifies batch_id comes from submit_batch. This adds value beyond the schema's field descriptions.

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 blocks until all jobs in a batch are terminal (done/error) or timeout, distinguishing it from get_batch_status by mentioning it returns the same rollup plus timed_out/waited_s. The verb 'Block' and resource 'batch' are specific.

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?

Explicitly says when to use (when you want to wait for batch completion) and provides fallback advice: if timed_out is true, call again or poll get_batch_status. Also mentions default and hard timeout, guiding usage.

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