Wait for a Wiro task

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and idempotent behavior, but the description adds non-obvious operational details: the need to repeat nextAction, the prohibition on calling run_model again, and the requirement to present all returned media resources. These enrich the agent's mental model beyond the structured hints.

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 three concise sentences that pack in the tool's purpose, the polling loop, and the final response behavior. Every sentence carries essential information with no fluff or repetition.

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?

The description fully covers the operational flow: waiting, repeating nextAction, and presenting media on completion. Combined with complete parameter schema and output schema, the agent has everything needed to use the tool effectively. The polling and completion behavior are thoroughly described.

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?

All three parameters (taskid, tasktoken, timeout_seconds) have complete, descriptive text in the schema, yielding 100% coverage. The tool description itself does not add parameter-specific meaning, so it stays at the baseline expected when the schema fully documents parameters.

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 waits for an existing Wiro task without submitting a new run, using a specific verb and resource. It explicitly distinguishes from run_model by saying 'without submitting a new model run,' making it distinct from the main sibling.

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?

Provides explicit usage instructions: if the task is still running, repeat the exact nextAction; never call run_model again for the same task. This tells the agent when to use the tool (polling loop) and when not to use alternatives, which is excellent guidance.

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