Get website setup status

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

Annotations already mark it read-only and non-destructive; the description adds behavioral context on top: the tool is meant to be polled, completion is represented by a `completed` status, and the resulting `website_uid` identifies the new website. It doesn't mention polling intervals or failure states, but the read-only profile lowers the burden.

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?

Two sentences, no filler. The first delivers the core purpose, and the second gives the exact polling behavior, with the key output (`website_uid`) front-loaded near the completion condition.

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 read-only status poll, the description covers enough: what it returns, when to call it, and what to look for at completion. There is no output schema, so mentioning `status` and `website_uid` is valuable; only a small amount of detail like non-completion states or polling cadence is absent.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds value by specifying that setup_uuid is the one 'returned from the provisioning request,' giving the agent provenance for that parameter beyond the schema's one-line label.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Returns the current status of an Agency Plan website setup.' It further clarifies the domain by referencing the setups endpoint and the terminal signal (status becomes completed, website_uid identifies the new website), which differentiates it from getWebsiteDetails and other listing tools.

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?

It gives explicit polling guidance: 'Poll this endpoint using the setup_uuid returned from the provisioning request until status becomes completed.' It does not name alternative tools or exclusion conditions, so it stops short of a 5, but the intended usage context is clear.

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