Wait for the confirmation code

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

The description discloses meaningful blocking behavior: 'It blocks until the message lands, so there is no need to poll or to sleep between calls.' It also states the extracted outputs. However, it does not disclose timeout behavior, what happens if no matching email arrives, or any side effects on the mailbox message.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words. The main action and result are front-loaded, followed by usage timing and a behavioral note that eliminates unnecessary polling patterns.

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?

The description covers when to call, what it returns, and the blocking behavior, which is sufficient for basic use. With no output schema, it appropriately mentions the return content. It does not cover timeout/error outcomes or how the 'from' and 'since' filters interact, but these are secondary.

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 100%, so the schema fully documents all four parameters. The description adds some context around the wait behavior but does not add parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema already provides, matching the baseline.

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 the verb 'wait' and resource 'email', and specifies the exact outputs: confirmation code and activation link. It is distinct from sibling tools like list_messages or read_message because it implies extraction rather than raw message retrieval, but it does not explicitly name or contrast any sibling.

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 gives explicit timing guidance: 'Call this right after triggering the signup.' It also advises against polling or sleeping between calls, which implies when not to use manual alternatives. However, it does not explicitly mention when to choose list_messages or read_message instead.

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