wait

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

Discloses polling interval (250ms), clamping of timeout_s, and MCP deadline. However, does not mention side effects of mark_read (default true) or that it may mark signals as read, given readOnlyHint is false.

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 and well-structured: describes behavior, then use case, then parameter details. No fluff, but could be slightly more structured with parameter list.

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 core behavior, use case, and two of three parameters. Missing mark_read semantics. Output schema exists, reducing need for return value explanation, but still incomplete for a moderate-complexity tool.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, description explains 'kinds' (comma-separated filter with examples) and 'timeout_s' (clamping). Omits explanation of 'mark_read' parameter entirely.

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 waiting for signals, with immediate return if unread. Specifies use case for realtime turn-based exchange, distinguishing it from send tools like broadcast/whisper.

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 says to use for realtime turn-based exchange with peers, implying context. Does not state when not to use or provide alternatives, but the sibling tools make the comparison clear.

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