pet_until

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral context. It discloses timeout behavior (machine left running, checkpoint removed) and that the machine stays stopped after count. However, it omits whether the tool is destructive, requires a session, or handles invalid ref gracefully.

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 concise sentences with minimal redundancy. Every sentence adds value, though the structure could be slightly improved (e.g., separating purpose from behavior). No fluff or tautology.

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 4 parameters, no output schema, and many sibling tools, the description is insufficient. It lacks information about return values (success behavior), session prerequisite, and error handling beyond timeout. The count>1 detail is useful but does not cover the overall completeness needed for safe invocation.

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 must compensate. It explains 'ref' (address/symbol), 'count' (frame stepping when >1), and 'timeout' (triggers error). However, 'session' parameter is left unexplained, and no default value context is provided for other parameters beyond schema defaults.

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?

Description uses a specific verb ('run') and resource ('address/symbol'), clearly distinguishing from siblings like pet_run (unconditional) and pet_step (single step). Additional details about count and frame stepping further clarify its unique function.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives (pet_run, pet_continue, pet_step). The mention of 'deterministic frame stepping' hints at a use case but does not provide clear when-to-use or when-not-to-use conditions.

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