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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new behaviour: the tool renders an interactive card and the actual order only occurs through the person's click, which explains the delayed side effect an agent would otherwise misattribute to this call.

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?

Three short sentences: what it shows, when to call it with which arguments, and what it does not do. The trigger condition is front-loaded and nothing repeats the schema.

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 two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the purpose, the calling condition, the argument correspondence, and the deferred side effect. An agent has everything needed to invoke it at the right moment.

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 only 50% (quantity carries no description), but the description compensates by saying both product_id and quantity must match those used in the create_order call that returned terms_required. That constraint is not expressed anywhere in the schema's maximum/minimum bounds.

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 names a specific verb and resource: it shows the person the terms and conditions for a planned order as a card with an "Zustimmen und bestellen" button. It also explicitly contrasts itself with create_order ("Legt selbst keine Bestellung an"), so an agent can distinguish it from the sibling that actually writes the order.

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?

It gives an explicit trigger: call it when create_order reports terms_required, passing the same product_id and quantity. It also states the negative case (this tool does not place an order; that happens only when the person clicks). No inference is required to pick between review_terms and create_order.

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