browser_wait

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

Without annotations, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It fails to clarify how the four parameters interact, specifically whether the 'timeout' applies only to condition checks or also to the 'ms' 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?

The description is extremely concise and efficient, communicating the two operational modes (time-based vs. condition-based) in a single, short sentence.

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 4-parameter tool with two distinct waiting modes, the description is incomplete. It does not detail the scope of the wait or the expected success/failure behaviors, especially regarding the timeout limit.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description offers no semantic meaning for any of the four parameters. It relies entirely on the agent knowing what 'ms', 'text', or 'selector' represent.

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 identifies the tool's function as waiting ('Espera') and states the resource scope (browser context). It successfully distinguishes this temporal function from most action-based sibling tools by focusing on waiting time or conditions.

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For instance, it does not explain if this is better used than, say, a polling mechanism like 'browser_watch' for specific use cases.

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