wait_for_approval

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

Without annotations, the description discloses polling behavior, final status return, and default timeout/interval. It mentions outcomes (approved, denied, expired) but omits error handling or cancellation behavior.

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?

Very concise: 4 sentences cover purpose, mechanism, return, usage, and defaults with no unnecessary words. Front-loaded with the core action.

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 the core workflow, blocking behavior, and defaults. Lacks explicit mention of timeout result (implied 'expired') and return format, but overall sufficient for a parametric wait tool with no output schema.

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% with descriptions already provided. The description repeats default values but adds no new meaning beyond the schema, earning the baseline score.

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 'Wait for an approval request to be resolved' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling 'check_approval' by noting it blocks until human responds.

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 this when you need to block until the human responds,' guiding when to use. It does not explicitly list alternatives but implies that non-blocking check is available via sibling tools.

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