WaitForPause

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld and non-destructive, so safety is covered. The description adds that the call is blocking and terminates on either pause or exit, which is useful, but it omits what happens on timeout (the 10s default), whether it returns the resulting state, and whether concurrent waiters are safe.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no waste. It is appropriately sized for a simple wait primitive, though it could have spent one more sentence on timeout/return behavior without becoming bloated.

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 a blocking wait tool with two undocumented parameters and no output schema, the description leaves key questions open: what does it return (paused state, exit code, or nothing), what happens on timeout, and how it differs from WaitForExit. Incomplete for the tool's complexity.

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 0% for two parameters (poll_ms, timeout_ms), and the description provides no parameter information at all. With no enum hints or defaults explained, the agent gets no syntax or semantics beyond the raw property names — a clear gap the description fails to compensate for.

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?

Clear verb+resource: it waits until the debuggee is paused or exits. However, it is not differentiated from the sibling WaitForExit — the description actually claims overlapping territory ('or exits') without explaining which of the two an agent should prefer.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance and no mention of alternatives such as WaitForExit, DebugPause, or GetDebugState. The agent must infer that this is a blocking synchronization primitive from the verb alone.

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