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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the possible statuses and the presence of tx hashes, but omits error handling, rate limits, or what happens for invalid ids. It's a read-only operation by nature, but that's not explicitly stated.

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 sentence that front-loads the purpose and lists statuses compactly. It's efficient, though the status list adds length; still, every part contributes to understanding.

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 status tool with no output schema, the description covers the main data (statuses and hashes) but lacks details on response structure, error cases, and polling behavior. It's adequate but not exhaustive.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description must explain the 'id' parameter. It does so by linking it to create_instant_shift, indicating it's the shift identifier. This adds meaning beyond the bare schema, though format/constraints are not detailed.

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 ('get') and resource ('instant shift') with the source of the id. Clearly distinguishes from siblings like create_instant_shift by referencing it as the origin of the id, making the tool's role 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?

Implies usage after creating an instant shift via create_instant_shift, which is clear from the description. However, it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, though siblings like build_swap_transaction are obviously different.

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