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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered; the description adds real behavioral context instead of repeating it – polling semantics, that some fields (receipt ID) only appear once available, and that digitalContent is populated once the order is paid. It does not mention rate limits or what happens if polling occurs too early beyond 'once available'.

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?

Three dense sentences with zero filler, front-loaded with purpose then timing then the conditional digital case. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description compensates by naming the returned fields and flagging the conditionally-present ones. For a two-parameter read tool, an agent has everything needed to call and interpret it.

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 both parameters are documented there, including that orderId comes from create_purchase, so the description adds little parameter-level detail. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema carries this burden.

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 and resource ('Polls an order placed by this agent') and enumerates what comes back (orderStatus, escrowStatus, funding timestamps, tracking, receipt ID, digitalContent). It is clearly distinguishable from create_purchase, cancel_order, and confirm_delivery, which it references by name.

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?

Gives explicit trigger conditions: poll after funding the deposit address, and after the seller ships, then before calling confirm_delivery. It also notes the digital-listing case, so the agent knows both the when and the conditional variation without inference.

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