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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description's 'retrieves' aligns with that. The description adds the detail that both buyers and sellers can retrieve, but does not disclose error behavior, permissions, or return format beyond the basic operation.

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 a single, focused sentence with no redundant words. It front-loads the category '[Buy]' and immediately states the action and object.

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 read-only tool with one parameter and existing annotations, the description conveys the essential purpose. However, without an output schema, it would benefit from clarifying what 'deliverable' means (e.g., file content, link) and any prerequisites, though these are partially covered by the '[Buy]' category.

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 schema has a single purchaseId parameter with no description coverage. The description's 'for a purchase' implies purchaseId identifies the purchase, and the parameter name is self-explanatory, but the description does not explicitly define the parameter's format or usage beyond that inference.

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 identifies the action ('retrieves'), the resource ('deliverable'), and the scope ('for a purchase'). It also specifies the actors (buyer or seller), which helps distinguish it from sibling tools like get_purchase or deliver_work.

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 this tool is used to retrieve a purchased deliverable, but it does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives such as get_purchase or confirm_delivery. No exclusions or alternative guidance is provided.

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