Poll an order by publicId. Once status is "paid" the payload carries downloadUrl (44.1 kHz WAV), invoiceUrl and certificateUrl (PDFs). Poll roughly every 15 seconds; a pending order older than 1 hour has expired.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| publicId | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the payload contents when status is 'paid' (downloadUrl, invoiceUrl, certificateUrl), the polling interval, and the expiration policy. This adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the schema, though it stops short of describing error responses or other statuses.
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?
Two sentences, directly front-loaded with the tool's purpose and essential operational details. No wasted words; every clause adds 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?
For a one-parameter polling tool with no output schema, the description covers the main behavioral aspects: URL payloads on success, polling interval, and expiration. It does not mention error handling or invalid publicId responses, but the core usage is adequately specified.
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 only mentions 'publicId' without adding context about its origin or format beyond what the schema already provides (string, 6-64 chars). The parameter is simple, but the description does not compensate for the lack of schema-level explanations.
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 function: 'Poll an order by publicId.' It specifies the resource (order) and the action (poll), and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_download_link or get_track by focusing on order status and the associated URLs returned once paid.
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 provides clear usage context: poll after creating a checkout, poll every 15 seconds, and treat pending orders older than 1 hour as expired. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when not to use, but the polling cadence and expiration rules give adequate guidance for typical use.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct resource and action: search, track details, license terms, checkout creation, order status polling, and download retrieval. There is no overlap; even the order-related tools serve different phases of the workflow.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (create_checkout, get_download_link, get_license_terms, get_order_status, get_track, search_tracks). The naming is uniform and predictable, with no mixed conventions.
With 6 tools, the set is well-scoped for a music licensing workflow. Each tool covers an essential step from discovery to fulfillment, without unnecessary bloat or redundancy.
The tools cover the full purchase lifecycle: searching and inspecting tracks, understanding license terms, creating a checkout, polling payment status, and retrieving downloads and documents. There are no obvious gaps that would prevent an agent from completing a licensing transaction.
