get_add_phone_status

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral burden. It discloses access requirements and polling behavior, which is useful. However, it does not define what terminal states look like, whether the operation is read-only, or what happens when the session_id is invalid or expired.

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 compact and front-loaded. The first sentence states the core purpose, the second gives the polling behavior, and the final access note is operationally necessary. No filler or redundant content.

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 one-parameter polling tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, polling behavior, and access requirements. It does not explicitly link session_id to start_add_phone or enumerate terminal states, but those are reasonably inferable from the tool name and the 'in-progress' qualifier.

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 input schema already describes session_id as 'Add-phone session ID' with 100% coverage. The description only restates 'by session ID' and adds no additional format, source, or constraint information beyond the schema.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Check the status of an in-progress phone addition by session ID.' This clearly identifies the tool's function and distinguishes it from related tools like get_add_email_status or start_add_phone.

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?

It explicitly instructs to 'Poll until terminal state,' which tells the agent how to use the result. It does not explicitly name alternatives or say when not to use it, but the in-progress phone addition context implies it should be called after start_add_phone.

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