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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. 'Poll' suggests a long-running operation that returns when terminal, but it does not disclose side effects, blocking behavior, or what happens on failure. No safety or mutability information is provided.

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 extremely concise, a single sentence, which is good for front-loading. However, it is under-specified to the point of being nearly useless, so the conciseness is not balanced with helpfulness.

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 tool with one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is the only source of context. It fails to explain what a durable request is, what terminal states exist, or what the return value looks like, making it incomplete for an agent to call correctly.

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 one required parameter request_id with no description, and schema description coverage is 0%. The description does not mention request_id at all, so it adds no meaning to the 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?

The description states a verb (poll) and a resource (durable request), but 'durable request' is vague and 'terminal' is undefined. It distinguishes from siblings only by the act of polling, but does not clarify what kind of request or when this polling is needed.

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 guidance is given on when to use this tool versus the many siblings (e.g., me_get_matches, me_get_provider_tasks). The description does not mention any conditions, prerequisites, or alternatives.

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