openclaw_plugin_approval_waitDecision

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

No annotations are provided, so the description alone must disclose behavior. It states the tool 'blocks' and is 'long-running,' which is helpful. However, it does not mention what happens on timeout, cancellation, or if the approval is never decided. No contradiction with annotations.

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 two short sentences, front-loading the core purpose. Every sentence adds value: first states what it does, second provides context (wraps a specific API and notes long-running). No wasted words.

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 the tool's complexity (blocking call with timeout) and lack of output schema, the description should explain the return value (e.g., the decision result) and timeout behavior. It fails to provide this, leaving the agent uncertain about what to expect after the call completes.

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 67% (2 of 3 params documented). The description adds no new parameter information beyond the schema's descriptions for 'id' and 'instance'. The undocumented 'timeoutMs' parameter is not explained, so the description does not compensate for the gap.

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 action: 'Block until a plugin approval gets a decision.' It specifies the resource ('plugin approval') and the operation ('wait for decision'), and differentiates from siblings like 'openclaw_exec_approval_waitDecision' by using 'plugin approval' explicitly.

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 (e.g., when to use exec vs plugin approval wait). It does not state when not to use it or any prerequisites. The only hint is 'Long-running', but no explicit usage context.

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