wait_for_text

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

No annotations provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It implies a blocking wait but does not state polling behavior, what happens on timeout, whether it returns the text, or any side effects.

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?

Extremely short to the point of under-specification; it is concise but fails to include necessary information, making the brevity a liability rather than an asset.

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?

With no output schema, no annotations, and undocumented parameters, the description is inadequate for correctly invoking this tool. An agent cannot determine required behavior from it.

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 for two parameters (text, timeout). The description mentions neither parameter nor their semantics (e.g., timeout units, text matching mode), leaving them completely undocumented.

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?

Description 'Wait for text (alias)' essentially restates the tool name and adds only that it is an alias, without specifying what text is waited for (appearance, change) or how it differs from siblings like wait_for or wait. This provides minimal differentiation.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus wait, wait_for, assert, or get_text. Usage context is entirely absent.

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