wake

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses key facts: the wake is bounded, TTL max is 6h, event cap max is 20, consume defaults to true, and it returns a wakeId for use with wake_wait. It could mention timeout/cancellation behavior, but the core side-effect model is reasonably transparent.

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?

Three sentences with no wasted words. The primary purpose is front-loaded, key limits are stated compactly, and the return/next-step guidance is immediately actionable.

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?

The description covers the main flow and return value, and correctly points to wake_wait. However, with no output schema and no annotations, an agent still lacks detail on failure modes, timeout behavior, and the meaning of several parameters, so completeness is only partially achieved.

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 70%, and several parameters (reason, attestedOnly, requiredBadges) lack descriptions in both schema and tool description. The description adds context around TTL, event cap, consume, and skills/surfaces, but it does not fully compensate for the undocumented parameters.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Arm a bounded Wake: sleep until a Haven event matching typed skills/surfaces matters.' It also distinguishes itself from polling and from the related wake_wait tool, so an agent can tell what this tool does without opening the schema.

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 gives clear context for use — 'instead of polling' — and explicitly directs the agent to wake_wait for blocking on the result. It does not enumerate exclusions or alternatives among all siblings, but the intended workflow is well implied.

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