set_wake_pending

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

No annotations present, so description carries full burden. It explains that setting pending=true blocks new messages from triggering wake, pending=false allows. However, it does not mention persistence, error conditions, or whether it overrides existing state, leaving moderate gaps.

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?

Highly concise: one-line summary, then clear bullet-like explanation of parameter effects, and a usage note. No unnecessary words. Front-loaded with purpose.

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 boolean setter with no output schema and no complex behaviors, the description fully informs the agent how and when to use it. No missing context.

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 0%, but the description adds full meaning to the single parameter 'pending': 'True to block wakes, False to allow.' This adds significant value beyond the schema's bare type and title.

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 action 'set' and the resource 'wake pending state', explaining what true/false do. It distinguishes itself from siblings like set_wake_config or set_wake_enabled by focusing on the pending sub-state.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: 'prevent duplicate wakes while the agent is working'. Provides clear effects for each value. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use but context is sufficient.

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