Get order and escrow status

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. 'Polls' conveys a read-only, repeatable operation, and 'once available' discloses that some data may be absent initially. It also scopes behavior to orders placed by the agent. It stops short of stating explicit side-effect-free guarantees or error behavior, but covers the essential polling semantics.

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?

Three sentences with no wasted words: purpose first, then return contents, then usage timing. The most actionable information (when to poll, before calling confirm_delivery) is placed toward the end but still compact and well-ordered.

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 one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the key needs: what it returns, when to poll, and how it fits in the order lifecycle. It lacks explicit notes on not-found behavior or retry semantics, but for a simple status-polling tool the guidance is strong.

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%: orderId is fully documented as the order ID returned by create_purchase. The description adds little about the parameter itself—'an order placed by this agent' is more resource scoping than parameter detail. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Polls an order placed by this agent,' and enumerates the exact return fields (orderStatus, escrowStatus, funding timestamps, tracking info, receipt ID). It differentiates from siblings by scoping to the agent's own orders and positioning itself as the pre-confirm_delivery status poller.

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 gives explicit lifecycle timing: 'Poll after funding the deposit address, and after the seller ships, before calling confirm_delivery.' This tells the agent exactly when to call the tool and explicitly excludes using it after confirm_delivery.

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