debug_wake_pipeline

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

Discloses that it creates a fake message and may invoke the wake callback, and that it is 'read-only with respect to QQ'. These details add value beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint). No contradiction detected because the description qualifies the read-only scope.

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 (two paragraphs) and front-loads the purpose. Every sentence contributes, though the second paragraph could be slightly shorter.

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?

Explains the response fields, distinguishes from diagnose_wake, and covers the main purpose. However, it does not mention error cases or prerequisites. Given no output schema, the description adequately describes expected output.

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. It mentions parameters only in passing ('from the given target_id and target_type') without explaining valid values, constraints, or semantics. This provides minimal additional meaning.

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 states 'Simulate a wake trigger to debug the wake pipeline' and explains the steps and response fields. It explicitly distinguishes from sibling tool 'diagnose_wake' by noting that diagnose_wake is a read-only snapshot without callback invocation.

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?

Provides explicit alternative: 'Use diagnose_wake for a read-only snapshot without triggering the callback.' It also explains the purpose (debugging) and what it checks, making it clear when to use this tool.

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