Wait

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds the key behavioral limit (maximum 30 seconds) and confirms the tool blocks for the given duration. No contradictions with annotations.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's function and constraints.

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 simple sleep tool with one parameter, complete annotations, and no output schema, the description covers the essential information. A minor gap is the behavior for invalid or out-of-range durations, but such detail is largely unnecessary for this straightforward action.

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 100%, providing the base parameter description ('Duration in seconds'). The tool description adds meaningful semantic value by specifying the upper bound ('up to 30 seconds'), which is not present in 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?

The description uses a specific verb ('Pause') and states the resource/action ('up to 30 seconds'), clearly distinguishing this from sibling tools like clicks, typing, and scrolling. There is no ambiguity about what the tool does.

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 clearly implies when to use the tool: when the agent needs to pause execution. Since no sibling tool offers similar waiting functionality, explicit exclusions or alternatives are unnecessary. The 'up to 30 seconds' qualifier also gives a concrete usage boundary.

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