agency-hosting_getWebsiteSetupStatusV1

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

Even though no annotations are provided, the description discloses that this is a polling-until-completion endpoint, that `website_uid` appears once setup completes, and that the tool is a read/status operation. This meaningfully expands beyond what a simple 'returns status' statement would provide.

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 two focused sentences with no filler. It front-loads the core purpose and follows with actionable polling guidance, making every sentence useful.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description carries the burden of explaining the return semantics. It explains the polling loop, terminal condition (`completed`), and the resulting `website_uid`, which is sufficient for an agent to invoke and interpret this tool correctly.

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 provides complete descriptions for both required parameters (`order_id` and `setup_uuid`) with 100% coverage. The description adds slightly useful context by stating `setup_uuid` comes from the provisioning request, but it doesn't add much beyond what the schema already communicates.

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 tool returns the current status of an Agency Plan website setup, with a specific verb ('Returns') and resource ('Agency Plan website setup'). It also references the provisioning flow via the setups endpoint, which distinguishes it from related tools like getWebsiteDetailsV1.

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?

The description explicitly tells the agent to poll this endpoint using the `setup_uuid` until `status` becomes `completed`, which is clear when-to-use guidance. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusion cases, but the polling workflow is well described.

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