swap_status

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

Adds value beyond annotations: polling recommendation, state lifecycle, and provider-specific check. Annotations already indicate read-only and non-destructive, but description enriches behavioral understanding.

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, no redundancy. Immediately states purpose and key usage details (polling, lifecycle, provider-specific).

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?

Covers essential aspects for a status check tool: polling behavior, lifecycle, and provider variation. No output schema, but lifecycle description compensates.

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 coverage is 100%, so description adds minimal extra meaning. Mentions that id and provider come from swap_create, which is helpful but not critical beyond schema.

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?

Explicitly states 'Check status of a swap order' with a specific verb and resource. Distinguishes from sibling tools like swap_create and swap_quote by focusing on status monitoring.

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?

Provides polling interval (every 20-30s), lifecycle states, and provider-specific behavior for Heleket. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use, the context is clear for a polling status tool.

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