ie_wait_text

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It explains polling behavior, frame scanning, and the return of a match preview. It could mention default timeout/interval values explicitly, but overall good disclosure.

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 with clear, front-loaded information. No unnecessary words, every sentence adds value.

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 and lack of output schema, the description adequately explains the polling behavior and return info. It could be more specific about the preview format or return structure, but it's sufficient for a wait 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?

Schema coverage is 50%. The description adds meaning to 'contains' (substring), 'gone' (disappear), and 'frame' (all frames unless given). However, it does not describe 'case_insensitive' or give explicit defaults for 'timeout' and 'interval', which the schema partially covers.

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 tool polls until a substring appears (or disappears with 'gone'), scanning all frames unless a specific frame is given, and returns which frame matched plus a preview. It distinguishes itself from ie_wait_ready for page load detection.

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 states when to use (for slow async content) and when not to use (for page load, use ie_wait_ready). Also mentions the 'gone' option for disappearance and frame targeting.

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