wait

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It clearly states that the tool waits for the specified time and returns a message, which is the core behavior. However, it does not disclose details such as whether the operation is synchronous, potential error conditions, or the exact content of the returned message.

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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that conveys the essential purpose without any fluff. It is concise and well-structured.

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 such a simple tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description is largely complete. It explains the action and the return of a message. It does not detail the message content, but the output schema likely covers that. Minor gaps are acceptable given the simplicity.

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?

The description explicitly clarifies that the parameter is in milliseconds, which adds meaning beyond the schema's property name and type. This is particularly helpful given the schema description coverage is 0%.

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 verb 'Wait' and the resource 'specified time in milliseconds', and specifies that it returns a message. It is specific and distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'random_float', which has a completely different purpose.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any preconditions or exclusions. It only states what the tool does without contextualizing it.

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