Poll Viewer Commands

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

Annotations are all false, so description must disclose behavior. It does not clarify if polling is blocking or non-blocking, what happens on no commands, or any side effects. Polling typically implies non-destructive reads, but annotations contradict by setting readOnlyHint to false, creating ambiguity.

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 concise (one sentence) and front-loaded with 'Internal:', which is useful. However, it sacrifices necessary detail for brevity, making it insufficient for an agent to use correctly.

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 simplicity (one param) and existence of an output schema, the description still falls short. It fails to explain the return format, polling behavior, or how it fits with sibling tools like 'navigate_viewer' or 'remount_viewer'. Essential context is missing.

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 explain the required parameter 'viewUUID'. It does not, leaving the agent to guess its purpose (likely a viewer identifier). No constraints or format details are provided.

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 identifies the tool's purpose: polling for pending viewer navigation commands. The verb 'poll' and resource 'pending viewer navigation commands' are specific and distinguish it from siblings like 'navigate_viewer' which triggers navigation.

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 lacks guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The prefix 'Internal:' hints at restricted usage but does not explain polling behavior, repetition, or context (e.g., after navigating). No exclusions or alternatives mentioned.

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