lc_wait_sensor_online

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

The description discloses that it polls and waits for online status with a bounded timeout, which covers basic behavior. However, it does not explain what happens on timeout (e.g., error or false return) or any side effects. With no annotations, it carries the full burden but only partially meets it.

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 extremely concise (one sentence) and front-loads the action and resource. Every word is informative with no fluff.

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 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too brief. It does not explain the return value, the effect of the polling parameters, or how the result is communicated. The agent lacks sufficient context to use the tool confidently.

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 0%, and the description adds no meaning to any of the 4 parameters. It does not explain oid, sensor_id, timeout_seconds, or poll_interval_seconds, leaving the agent to guess their roles.

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 clearly states the action ('poll') and resource ('one sensor') with a specific condition ('until online or bounded timeout'). It distinguishes from siblings like lc_list_online_sensors and lc_get_sensor by focusing on waiting for a specific sensor to come online.

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 needing to wait for a sensor to be online, but does not explicitly provide guidance on when to use vs alternatives (e.g., lc_list_online_sensors or lc_get_sensor). No exclusion criteria are mentioned.

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