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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint, so the trailing 'Read-only' is redundant, but the description adds real behavioral context the annotations cannot: the three-state lifecycle, that 'ready' yields mediaUrls, and that 'expired' requires a fresh link. No auth or rate-limit notes, but the state machine is the important disclosure here.

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?

One dense sentence that front-loads the resource, then the state semantics. Every clause carries usable information with no filler.

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 one-parameter read-only status check with no output schema, the description supplies exactly what an agent needs: what states are possible, what each implies, and the next action for each. Nothing material is missing.

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 100% and the single dropId parameter is fully documented in the schema, including its origin in create_media_upload. The description adds no format or constraint detail beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: checking the status of an upload link created by create_media_upload, and enumerates the three possible states. Clearly distinguishable from siblings like get_post_status or validate_post.

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?

Gives actionable per-state guidance: 'ready' means pass mediaUrls to create_post, 'expired' means create a new link, 'waiting' means the user hasn't finished. It lacks an explicit when-not-to-use or a named alternative tool, but the workflow routing is clear.

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