Get one premium order

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Status of a premium order' signals a read-only operation, and 'poll this' plus 'recover from a timed-out call' convey idempotency and safe repeated invocation. It does not discuss auth, rate limits, or error behavior, but it covers the essential behavioral profile for a getter.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and followed by concrete usage guidance. Every word earns its place, with no filler or redundancy.

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 status getter with no output schema, the description gives enough context to call it correctly: what it returns conceptually, when to call it, and how it fits the order lifecycle. It does not describe status values or error conditions, but these are not essential for selecting and invoking the tool.

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 0% and the description does not mention orderId at all. The parameter name is self-explanatory, and the lifecycle context (after create_premium_order) hints at where the ID comes from, but the description adds little explicit meaning 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 clearly identifies the resource as a premium order and the action as retrieving its status, which is more specific than the title alone. It does not explicitly contrast with closely related siblings like get_premium_delivery, so it stops short of a full 5.

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 gives explicit when-to-use guidance: poll after create_premium_order or recover from a timed-out call. It does not state when not to use it or name alternative tools, so it lacks the full exclusionary guidance of a 5.

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