Check whether a purchase started with the purchase tool has been approved and paid. Returns status: pending | paid | expired. Once paid, the entitlement is granted and install returns the source or signed download URL.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| purchase_id | Yes | The purchase_id returned by the purchase tool. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It clearly says this is a check ('Check whether') and discloses the three possible statuses and the consequence of a paid status. It does not mention side effects or error conditions, but for a simple status check this is sufficient.
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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and every phrase adds value: the statuses, the entitlement effect, and the install connection. No filler or repetition.
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 status-check tool with one well-documented parameter and no output schema, the description fully covers the essential behavior: what it checks, possible outcomes, and what happens when paid. It is complete without needing further elaboration.
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 input schema already documents the only parameter (`purchase_id`) with a clear description ('The purchase_id returned by the purchase tool'), achieving 100% schema coverage. The description adds no additional parameter meaning, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.
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 uses a specific verb ('Check whether') and clearly identifies the resource (a purchase started with the `purchase` tool). It also differentiates from siblings by explicitly referencing the purchase flow and the resulting status values.
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 when to use: after starting a purchase with the `purchase` tool, to check its status. It also ties to the `install` tool outcome ('Once paid, the entitlement is granted and install returns...'), providing clear context. No explicit exclusions or alternatives are stated, but the usage context is clear.
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.
Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, but there is some overlap: search and search_components both find products (one whole marketplace, one UI components only), and get_component and inspect both retrieve product information (one for source, one for manifest). These are distinguishable by their descriptions and use cases.
The tools follow a mostly consistent verb-based pattern with snake_case (check_purchase, get_component, search_components), but three tools are single verbs without an object (inspect, install, purchase). This is a minor deviation from the verb_noun convention used by the others.
Seven tools is well-scoped for a marketplace server. Each tool covers a necessary step in the workflow (search, evaluate, purchase, install) without bloat, and there are no redundant utilities.
The tool set covers the full marketplace lifecycle: discovery (search, search_components), evaluation (inspect, get_component), acquisition (purchase, check_purchase), and installation (install). The flow from search to install is seamless, with no obvious dead ends or missing critical operations.