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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is known. The description adds useful behavioral details: it mentions the purchase intent was created via nexbid_purchase, and specifies output as current status (pending/completed/expired) and checkout link if active. No contradictions.

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 structured into clear sections with minimal content. Every phrase earns its place: tool purpose, usage timing, prerequisite, and output format. No redundancy or verbose language.

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 single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers all essential context: when to use, prerequisite (intent_id from nexbid_purchase), and expected output format. The combination hint adds workflow context. Complete for the tool's complexity.

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 100%, so the parameter intent_id is already well-documented as a purchase intent UUID from nexbid_purchase. The description repeats this same information in <when_to_use>, adding marginal value beyond the schema. Baseline 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 clearly states the tool checks the status of a purchase intent created via nexbid_purchase. It specifies the exact resource (purchase intent) and action (check status), distinguishing it from sibling tools like cancel, settle, or nexbid_purchase itself.

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 <when_to_use> section explicitly states this tool should be used after nexbid_purchase when the user wants the order status. The combination hints reinforce that it always follows nexbid_purchase and no other tool is needed, providing clear usage context.

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