wait_for_download

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool waits for specific events, but does not explain timeout behavior, return values, or potential side effects. The mechanism is partially transparent but leaves important behavioral aspects unspecified.

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 concise sentence with a usage example, front-loading the tool's name and core purpose. No unnecessary information wastes the reader's attention.

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 simple wait tool, the description conveys the core purpose and mechanism, but lacks details on return values, failure handling, and relationship to sibling tools. With many similar wait tools present, additional context would improve completeness, but the current level is minimally adequate.

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?

The schema provides no description for the timeout parameter (0% coverage), and the description only shows an example call with 30, implying it is a timeout value. However, units (seconds vs milliseconds) and default behavior are not clarified, adding limited meaning 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 clearly states the tool waits for download completion after triggering a download, and specifies the underlying events (downloadWillBegin/Progress). This distinguishes it from sibling wait tools like wait_for_load and wait_for_network_idle.

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?

The description implies usage ('after clicking download') but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions or prerequisites. It offers no guidance on choosing between this and other wait tools.

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