wait_for_output

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for disclosing behavior. It mentions waiting and pattern matching but omits critical details: blocking until timeout, what happens on no match, and side effects like buffer clearing. The 'clear_buffer' parameter suggests output consumption, which is not addressed.

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 concise sentence, front-loading the core action. However, it sacrifices necessary details for brevity, making it insufficient for complete understanding given the tool's complexity.

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 5 parameters, lack of annotations, and an output schema, the description should cover the wait loop, return value, and buffer behavior. It only covers the basic matching concept, leaving significant gaps for effective tool 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate by explaining parameters. It only hints at 'regex' via the matching mention but does not clarify 'clear_buffer', 'session_id', or timeout behavior. The agent must infer meanings from parameter names alone.

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 action ('wait for') and resource ('remote session output') with the matching mechanism ('regex or literal pattern'). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like 'read_output', which reads current output without waiting. However, it could be more explicit about the blocking nature and timeout behavior.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'read_output' or other session tools. The description lacks context on prerequisites, conditions, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name and siblings.

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