pet_wait_break

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses key behaviors: machine stops on fire, runs on timeout, result shape, and that timeout returns data not error. No misleading statements.

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?

Two sentences, no wasted words. Front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by critical timeout behavior. Efficient and easy to parse.

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?

Covers firing and timeout scenarios well, explains result structure. No output schema, but description provides that. Missing explanation of session parameter, but overall adequate for a waiting tool with clear state changes.

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 has 0% description coverage. Description only mentions timeout in timeout context, but does not explain the session parameter or its default. Lacks clarity on what session means (e.g., which debug session).

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 breakpoint/watchpoint fires and reports checkpoint id, PC, and registers. Distinguishes from sibling wait tools like pet_wait_mem and pet_wait_text by its specific focus on breakpoints/watchpoints.

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 clear context on timeout behavior (machine left running, result structure). Does not explicitly state when to use versus alternatives like pet_break_list or pet_watch_add, but the purpose is sufficiently distinct.

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