nexo_lifecycle_wait_for_diary

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

No annotations are provided, so description must disclose behavior. It mentions waiting but does not describe timeout behavior, side effects, or whether it blocks indefinitely. Parameters imply polling but are not explained.

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?

Description is a single sentence of 12 words, front-loaded with the verb. It is concise but could benefit from structured parameter hints.

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 tool with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description lacks details on behavior, parameter ranges, and return values. It is insufficient for complete understanding.

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%, and description adds no parameter explanations. event_id, timeout_ms, and poll_ms are not described, leaving the agent without guidance on their meaning.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'Wait' and identifies distinct resource (session_diary evidence) and context (canonical lifecycle event before Desktop stops session), distinguishing it from sibling lifecycle tools like nexo_lifecycle_wait_for_stop or nexo_lifecycle_complete_canonical.

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?

Description implies usage context ('before Desktop stops the session') but does not explicitly state when to avoid this tool or name alternatives. It provides clear context but lacks exclusions.

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