check_api_key_status

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

With no annotations, description carries full burden and discloses polling behavior, status transition from 'pending' to 'ready', and that response includes API key when ready. Missing error handling details (e.g., invalid email), but adds significant behavioral context.

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 purpose first, followed by usage guidelines and behavioral details. Every sentence contributes meaning, no redundant or missing parts.

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 polling tool with one parameter and no output schema, description covers essential flow: polling interval, status transition, and key retrieval. Lacks error handling for invalid requests, but overall adequate.

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?

Only one parameter 'email' with 0% schema description coverage. Description adds value by stating to use the same email as in request_api_key, which is crucial for correct usage.

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 pending API key request' with a specific verb and resource. It explicitly references the sibling tool 'request_api_key', distinguishing its role as a polling companion for status checking.

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?

Clear context provided: use same email from request_api_key, poll every 10 seconds, and expect status change after user clicks verification link. No explicit exclusions, but the usage flow is well-defined.

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