typesafe_wait

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'Wait briefly', which doesn't specify whether it blocks, what happens on timeout, side effects, or what the response contains. It's a significant gap for a blocking operation.

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 one sentence with no fluff, which is efficient. However, its brevity comes at the cost of missing key information, so while it's concise, it's not sufficiently informative.

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 tool, the description lacks information about return values, blocking behavior, timeouts, and typical usage scenarios. With no annotations and no output schema, the agent has little context to invoke it correctly.

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 single parameter 'seconds' is documented in the schema with type, default, min, and max, but the tool description never mentions it. Since schema description coverage is 0%, the description should explain the parameter's purpose, but it doesn't, leaving the agent to guess that the wait duration is controlled by seconds.

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 verb 'Wait' and identifies the resource as 'host request or run completion', which is specific enough to distinguish from siblings like typesafe_run or typesafe_status. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with alternatives, and 'briefly' is vague, but the core action is clear.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings. It doesn't mention prerequisites, conditions, or alternatives. An agent would have to infer that it's used after triggering a run or request.

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