pause

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

With no annotations, the description fully carries the burden. It explicitly states the tool holds for N seconds, which is the complete behavioral contract for a simple delay. It adds context about presenter pacing, though it does not mention blocking behavior (which is implied and unlikely to need disclosure).

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the action ('Hold for N seconds') and provides useful context in the second clause. Every word earns its place.

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 the tool's extreme simplicity (one parameter, no output schema, no side effects), the description provides all necessary information: what it does and why. There are no gaps.

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% for the single 'seconds' parameter. The description's 'N seconds' loosely references it but adds no new meaning beyond the schema's 'seconds to wait'. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 the specific verb 'Hold' with a clear resource ('N seconds'), and the phrase 'presenter beats between actions' conveys the tool's role. It is distinct from all sibling tools, none of which perform a similar delay function.

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 indicates a clear usage context: between actions to let viewers absorb content. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the purpose is unambiguous for a timing utility.

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