black_souls_wait

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, so the tool is safe and non-destructive. The description adds the context of blocking ('before proceeding'), but does not explain polling behavior, potential delays, or failure cases (e.g., timeout). The timeout parameter is not mentioned in the description.

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 very concise at one sentence, but it omits essential parameter and behavioral details that would improve usability. While front-loaded with purpose, it sacrifices completeness for brevity.

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 moderate complexity (multiple condition types, a timeout parameter, blocking behavior) and that an output schema exists, the description is insufficient. It does not list condition types or explain how to use timeout, leaving the agent uninformed.

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 0%, so the description must compensate by explaining parameter meanings. It does not mention 'condition' or 'timeout_ms', nor the various condition types (scene, not_scene, battle_end, etc.). The description adds no semantic value beyond the schema.

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 states the verb 'wait' and the resource 'game condition', making the core purpose clear. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like black_souls_get_state by signaling that it blocks until a condition is met, though it could specify the condition types available.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., polling with get_state or using other triggers). The description does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or recommended scenarios.

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