sezzle_detect_stuck_authorizations

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the filtering criteria of approved+uncaptured and a time threshold, but fails to define what 'progressed' means (e.g., capture, refund) or what the tool actually returns.

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 a single, tightly worded sentence with no filler. It is front-loaded and gets directly to the point, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 three parameters, no output schema, and a non-trivial detection logic, the description is far too sparse. It doesn't mention that orders is an input list, doesn't clarify how 'progressed' is evaluated, and doesn't describe the return value. This leaves a knowledgeable agent guessing about invocation details.

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 0% and the description does not explain any of the three parameters (orders, now, threshold_minutes). The word 'threshold' only vaguely hints at threshold_minutes, and orders/now are completely absent, leaving the agent without the needed input semantics.

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 uses a specific verb (Find) and a specific resource (approved uncaptured authorizations) with a clarifying condition (not progressed within a threshold). This clearly delineates it from sibling tools like sezzle_detect_uncaptured_orders, which target a broader set of uncaptured orders.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as sezzle_detect_uncaptured_orders or sezzle_audit_auth_capture_flow. The description gives no contexts, exclusions, or selection criteria beyond the inherent purpose.

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