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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavior; 'Retrieve' signals read-only and the metric list indicates what is returned. It does not disclose potential latency, whether settlement status is final or pending, or any side effects, but for a simple read tool this is minimally adequate.

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?

One sentence with a clear front-loaded verb and object, followed by a compact list of returned fields. There is no fluff 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?

The tool is simple (one required parameter, no output schema), and the description lists the key return dimensions. It is slightly incomplete around what 'pacing' and 'settlement status' mean, but an agent can call it correctly with the order_id from the schema.

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% for the single order_id parameter, so the schema carries the semantic weight ('The order ID returned by create_ad_order'). The description adds nothing parameter-specific, matching the baseline.

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 ('Retrieve') and a clear resource ('real delivery for an order'), then enumerates the exact data returned. Among siblings like create_ad_order and estimate_ad_cost, it clearly identifies itself as the read-back telemetry tool.

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?

No statement about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as estimate_ad_cost or check_neuron_inventory. The prerequisite that order_id comes from create_ad_order appears only in the schema, not as guidance in the description.

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