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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine value beyond that by explaining what each status means (e.g. 'refused (nothing charged)', 'expired (the link ran out unpaid)') and noting the response carries 'a plain message'.

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?

It is a single front-loaded sentence that leads with the core purpose ('Where a lease stands'). The dense parenthetical enumeration is long but every clause earns its place by disambiguating a status value.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value structure need not be explained, and the description still conveys the state space and the accompanying message. For a one-parameter read tool this is essentially complete.

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 coverage is 100% and the single leaseId parameter is documented in the schema ('The leaseId from start_lease'). The description adds no additional parameter detail, so the baseline 3 applies when the schema carries the semantics.

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 clear read purpose ('Where a lease stands') and enumerates the exact status values, so an agent knows it retrieves lease state. It doesn't explicitly contrast with siblings, but the siblings (find_windows, get_prices, get_window, start_lease) are distinct enough that the resource is unambiguous.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use statement, but the workflow link is implied through the schema's 'leaseId from start_lease' and the state vocabulary (awaiting_payment, live, expired). The agent can infer this is a post-start_lease status check, though polling timing or alternatives are never stated.

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