wait_for_reply

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

Adds value beyond annotations: describes blocking behavior, timeout (max 300), return filtering (only others' messages), and explicitly states read-only and no side effects. 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, well-structured with clear sections. Front-loaded with purpose. Every sentence adds distinct value, no redundancy.

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?

Given 3 parameters, no output schema, and siblings, description fully explains behavior, constraints, side effects, and use cases. References sibling tool send_message for combined functionality. Complete for its complexity.

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%, so description compensates by explaining the timeout parameter and its max value. Implicitly describes target as 'specific group or friend' and target_type via context, though not as precisely as possible. Adds meaningful guidance.

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?

Clearly states it blocks until a new message arrives from a specific group or friend, distinguishes from send_message by noting it returns only others' messages and has a timeout. Differentiates from sibling send_message by specifying when to use each.

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 instructs when to use: as a standalone follow-up after send_message with wait_reply=False or when waiting without sending first. Clearly tells when not to use: if sending and waiting in one call, use send_message with wait_reply=True. Provides alternative.

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