cap_trade_confirm_get

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

Discloses that the tool returns status values, but does not mention error handling, idempotency, or any side effects. Since no annotations are provided, more detail would be beneficial.

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?

Single sentence, directly states the action and possible results. No unnecessary words.

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?

Given the existence of an output schema, the description captures the basic operation. However, it lacks context about prerequisites, error cases, or relationship to other confirmation tools.

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 description mentions 'deal reference' which corresponds to the parameter, but does not elaborate on format, constraints, or examples. With 0% schema description coverage, more parameter context is needed.

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?

Clearly states the tool retrieves deal-confirmation status, lists possible values (ACCEPTED/REJECTED/pending), and specifies the input is a deal reference. Distinguishes from sibling tools like cap_trade_confirm_wait which implies polling.

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?

While the purpose is clear, no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given, especially relative to cap_trade_confirm_wait. The agent must infer that this is a one-time check.

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