wait_for_node

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and non-destructive behavior. Description adds the blocking behavior and timeout aspect, plus conditions (RUNNING game). No contradictions. However, does not describe what happens on timeout or success (e.g., return value).

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 concise sentences, no redundant information. Front-loaded with the primary action and key usage advice. Every sentence adds value.

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?

Covers purpose and usage context well, but fails to describe return value (e.g., whether it returns the node, a boolean, or throws error). No output schema exists, so description should at least mention what the tool outputs.

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 has 0% description coverage. Description only indirectly implies 'path' is node path/name and timeout_ms is a timeout, but does not specify units, defaults, or that path is required. Lacks detailed parameter guidance.

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?

Clearly states the tool blocks until a node appears or timeout, with specific verb 'wait' and resource 'node in RUNNING game'. Distinguishes itself by mentioning use after play_scene to sync before driving, setting it apart from siblings like wait_until.

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 'Use after play_scene to sync before driving', giving a clear scenario. Does not explicitly list when not to use or alternatives, but the context is specific enough for an agent to infer appropriate usage.

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