Get Onboarding Status

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

Despite strong annotations (readOnly, idempotent), the description adds valuable behavioral context: auth_source meaning, step_visibility interpretation, and a clarification that certain integration_state values are expected and not errors. These prevent misinterpretation of response data.

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 well-structured with a clear opening, use-context, return list, exclusions, and key behaviours. Every section adds value and the formatting makes key facts scannable without unnecessary verbosity.

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?

Considering the absence of an output schema, the description compensates by listing return attributes and explaining important response semantics. It also situates the tool within the 5-step onboarding flow and differentiates it from related tools, making it sufficiently complete for an agent.

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 description coverage is 100%, including token provenance and expiry, so the description need not repeat parameter details. The tool description does not add much about the parameter itself, matching the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 states the verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('current onboarding state'), and explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling pop_onboarding_get_account_setup by noting it does NOT return configurations. The purpose is unambiguous and well-differentiated.

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 provides explicit when-to-use context ('step 3 of 5', 'use to poll state or check progress') and names the alternative tool for configurations. This gives clear usage direction within the onboarding sequence.

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