Poll Viewer Commands

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=false, which is surprising for a tool whose name and description say 'poll', but the description never explains the side effect (e.g., that polling consumes/clears pending commands). With annotations present the bar is lower, yet the key behavioral question raised by the annotations goes unanswered.

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?

A single short sentence with the scoping qualifier ('Internal') front-loaded and no wasted words. It is efficient, though its brevity is partly the source of the missing context rather than pure economy.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be described, but for a non-idempotent, non-read-only tool with an undocumented parameter, the definition leaves too much unstated. An agent cannot tell whether polling mutates state, how viewUUID is obtained, or when this tool should be invoked.

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?

The schema has one required parameter, viewUUID, with 0% description coverage, and the description does not mention it at all. The baseline-3 rule applies only when schema coverage is high; here the description must compensate and does not, so it falls below baseline.

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?

States a specific verb ('poll') and resource ('pending viewer navigation commands'), and the 'Internal:' prefix signals this is an internal mechanism rather than an agent-facing action. It is distinguishable from siblings like navigate_viewer and remount_viewer, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with them.

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 'Internal:' marker hints that this tool is not meant for general use, but the description gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, no conditions, and no reference to navigate_viewer or remount_viewer as alternatives. An agent has to guess whether polling complements or replaces those tools.

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