wait

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It hints at blocking behavior via 'before returning,' which is useful, but does not state whether the call is synchronous, any maximum duration, or consequences of long waits.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It delivers the essential behavior immediately.

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 one-parameter, no-output tool this is nearly adequate, but it omits the default value, bounds, and return behavior that an agent would want before invoking a blocking wait.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description is the only source of meaning for the single 'duration' parameter, and it does supply the unit ('seconds') that the schema omits. However, it does not clarify the default of 1, allowed ranges, or whether fractional values are accepted.

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?

States a specific verb (wait) and the resource/unit (seconds), so an agent immediately knows this is a blocking sleep. No sibling does anything similar, so sibling differentiation is unnecessary rather than missing.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus alternatives (e.g., batch_actions for sequencing, or polling loops). The agent is left to infer that this is a delay primitive with no context about typical use cases.

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