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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond that: it requires a token, and it discloses that paused sandboxes expose pause_reason and delete_after, which previews conditional behavior of the payload.

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?

A single dense sentence, front-loaded with the status fields before the usage/billing fields. Every clause earns its place, though the run-on length makes it slightly harder to scan than a short bulleted list would be.

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?

There is no output schema, so the agent must otherwise guess the return shape; the description compensates by enumerating the state, mode, and cost fields. Combined with annotations covering the read-only profile, this is nearly complete, missing only guidance on when to call it versus sibling status tools.

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?

Only one parameter, and schema description coverage is 100% with a pattern and an example id format, so the schema fully carries the semantics. The description adds nothing about sandbox_id itself; the 'Requires: token' note refers to auth, not a parameter.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Status of one sandbox') and enumerates the exact fields returned (state, mode, tariff, expires_at, usage metrics). The singular 'one sandbox' + required sandbox_id clearly distinguishes it from the sibling list_sandboxes.

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?

Usage is implied by the naming and the sandbox_id requirement, but the description never states when to reach for this over siblings like list_sandboxes, get_vps_status, or sandbox_pricing, nor any exclusions or prerequisites beyond auth.

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