wave_follow_up_scan

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits. It does not mention if the tool is read-only, modifies data, returns results, or requires specific permissions. The description lacks any transparency about side effects.

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 a single sentence, which is concise but lacks necessary details. It is front-loaded but not sufficiently informative; every sentence should earn its place, but this one fails to provide enough 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 has only one required parameter and no output schema, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to explain what the tool returns, how it behaves, or any practical usage context.

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 the description does not explain the only parameter 'workspace_id'. It adds no meaning beyond the basic schema, leaving the parameter's purpose and usage completely unexplained.

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 specifies the verb 'scan' and resource 'tasks with natural language due dates', which clarifies its function. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_entities or wave_triage, though 'scan' is a bit ambiguous.

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?

No usage guidelines are given; it does not state when to use this tool versus alternatives like wave_triage or wave_check_messages. The description only implicitly suggests usage for scanning tasks with natural language due dates.

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