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

Even with readOnlyHint=true already in annotations, the description adds meaningful behavioral detail: it holds the request open, has a maximum hold time, returns as soon as the booking is paid, and implies a retry loop condition. This goes well beyond what the annotation conveys and sets accurate expectations for long-polling behavior.

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 compact and front-loaded: the first sentence defines the behavior, and the second provides actionable usage. Every sentence contributes practical value with no filler.

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 output schema exists and this is a read-only long-polling tool, the description covers the essential operational context: when to call, what triggers a return, and the retry condition. The 'after handing the buyer the payment_url' guidance anchors it in the booking flow.

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 only 33%, and the description does little to compensate. It indirectly references the timeout concept with 'up to 25 seconds' and 'the hold has time left', but it does not explain booking_uuid, locale, or timeout_seconds as parameters. An agent would have to infer most parameter meanings from context.

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's purpose: it waits for a booking to be paid, holding the request open up to 25 seconds and returning as soon as payment occurs. It also explicitly differentiates itself from the sibling get_booking_status by contrasting its long-polling behavior.

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 gives explicit, practical guidance: call it after handing the buyer the payment_url, use it instead of polling in a loop, and repeat while the status is still awaiting_payment and the hold has time left. This makes the intended usage unambiguous.

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