Await Pending Response

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, and the description adds behavioral details: same return format as convoreply, timeout specifics (default 50, max 55), and session_id importance. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Concise with clear structure: introductory sentence, usage trigger, then REQUIRES/OPTIONAL sections. Every sentence adds value, uses emoji and bold for emphasis. No wasted text.

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?

Covers return format, timeout behavior, and session_id pattern. Lacks detail on error handling or timeout expiration, but given annotations and schema, it is reasonably complete for a recovery tool with 3 params and no output schema.

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 coverage is 100%, but the description adds significant meaning: explains session_id origin, message_id from timeout error, and timeout defaults. Provides context like 'For Cursor, use 50' that goes beyond schema.

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 waits for a pending response after a convoreply timeout, specifying the action and resource. It distinguishes from convoreply and other sibling tools by focusing on recovery after timeout.

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 explicitly says to use this tool when convoreply returned a timeout error, and mentions it avoids resending messages. While it doesn't explicitly list when not to use it, the context is clear and prerequisites are stated.

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