chrome_wait_for

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

Since annotations are absent, the description carries full burden. It discloses return format (success status, conditions met, actual state, time elapsed), timeout behavior (returns current state instead of error), and chaining capability, providing valuable behavioral context beyond what annotations would offer.

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?

Three sentences, each with a distinct purpose: purpose, return behavior, timeout/chaining. No unnecessary wording, and the most important information (purpose) is front-loaded.

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?

Given 5 parameters all documented in schema and no output schema, the description compensates by explaining return values and timeout behavior. It covers the key aspects: what it does, what it returns, and how it behaves on timeout, making it complete for the tool's complexity.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with detailed parameter descriptions, so baseline is 3. Description adds the chaining concept, indicating multiple conditions can be combined, and clarifies that the tool returns which conditions were met—modest but useful addition beyond the schema.

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 states 'Wait for UI state changes after actions' with a clear verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling chrome_* tools by focusing on waiting for conditions rather than navigation or interaction.

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?

Description states contextual use 'after actions' and notes 'Can chain multiple conditions,' giving user guidance on when to use. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough for typical workflows.

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