Wait for debugger pause

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral transparency. It discloses the polling mechanism and timeout behavior, but fails to mention return values, whether the session must already be attached, or any side effects on event consumption. This leaves significant ambiguity for a tool with no annotation support.

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 a single clear sentence that directly states the tool's purpose and termination conditions. It is front-loaded and avoids unnecessary words, earning a high score for conciseness.

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 tool with three parameters and no output schema, the description is severely underspecified. It omits parameter semantics, return value, prerequisites (e.g., an attached CDP session), and relationship to sibling tools, making it inadequate for reliable invocation.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, and the tool description does not mention any parameters (sessionId, timeoutMs, targetSessionId). The agent receives no explanation of what each parameter means or how they relate to the polling behavior, so the description adds no semantic value.

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 tool's function: it polls raw CDP events until Debugger.paused is observed or timeout expires. The specific verb 'poll' and the target event distinguish it from sibling tools like debugger_pause (which triggers a pause) and debugger_get_paused_state (which reads current state).

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 implies usage when the agent needs to block until a pause event occurs, but it does not explicitly mention when to use this over siblings or any prerequisites. No exclusions or alternative tool references are provided, so guidance is only implicit.

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