coronium_get_payment_status

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 only says 'Check the status' which implies a read operation but doesn't explicitly state it's non-mutating, nor does it disclose auth requirements, return format, or any side effects. Minimal behavioral disclosure beyond the basic action.

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 sentences with front-loaded purpose followed by usage context. No unnecessary words – every word earns its place, making it highly concise and easy to parse.

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-param tool without an output schema, the description provides purpose and usage context but omits expected response/status values. The agent knows when and how to call it, but not what the response will look like, leaving some ambiguity for a status-check 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?

The schema provides no description for payment_id (0% coverage), but the description phrase 'by id' reinforces its purpose as the payment identifier. However, no format or example is given, so the agent must infer the expected string format.

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?

Description states 'Check the status of a payment by id' – a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing it from sibling 'coronium_get_payments' which likely lists payments. The mention of buy/renew operations further clarifies its specific role.

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?

Explicitly provides usage context: 'Useful after coronium_buy_modems_with_balance / coronium_renew_modems_with_balance to confirm settlement.' This tells the agent exactly when to call this tool, satisfying the requirement for clear when-to-use guidance.

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