Wait for SMS on Existing Order

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

The description discloses the blocking nature, WebSocket delivery with polling fallback, and timeout behavior. This adds significant context beyond annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint) which do not cover blocking behavior.

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 three sentences, each essential: purpose, technical details, and integration guidance. No redundancy, front-loaded with the main action.

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 no output schema, the description covers the blocking behavior, timeout, and usage sequence. It could mention expected return on success/failure, but is adequate for a simple wait tool.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, the description adds value by specifying that order_id should come from create_order, which is not in the schema. For timeout_seconds, it adds no extra meaning beyond schema defaults, but the overall context is helpful.

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 waits (blocks) for an SMS on an existing order_id or until timeout. It distinguishes from siblings by explicitly noting it uses an existing order_id from create_order and is meant for waiting, unlike other tools like get_sms or create_order.

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 says to pass an order_id from create_order and suggests calling create_order first. It implies usage after order creation but does not explicitly compare with alternatives like get_sms for non-blocking retrieval.

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