pane_wait_output

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful blocking semantics and immediate-match-on-existing-output behavior. However, it omits what happens on timeout, precedence when both match and regex are supplied, and the meaning of 'source'.

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 tight sentences with the blocking behavior front-loaded and the immediate-match nuance second. No wasted words, though it's too terse given the parameter gaps.

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?

An output schema exists so return values needn't be explained, but with 6 params at 0% coverage and an opaque 'source' enum plus a timeout, the description leaves too much unspecified for an agent to call this correctly.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains match (literal substring) and regex (Rust regex) well, but leaves pane_id, lines, timeout_ms, and the four-value 'source' enum entirely undocumented across 6 parameters.

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?

States a specific verb ('Block until') and resource ('pane output contains...'), and distinguishes the two match modes (literal substring vs Rust regex). It's clear what the tool does, though it doesn't name a sibling like pane_read or agent_wait to differentiate.

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 versus pane_read or agent_wait/events_wait, and no prerequisites. The only contextual hint is 'Output that already exists matches immediately,' which is behavioral, not usage-routing.

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