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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that results only materialize once the upload completes, but says nothing about what a still-pending response contains, whether polling is required, or any rate limits.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and followed immediately by the return behavior. No filler or redundancy.

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 tool with annotations covering the safety profile and no output schema, the description is nearly sufficient, telling the agent what it gets back. It stops short of describing the pending-state response, which an agent polling this endpoint would benefit from knowing.

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 a single parameter at 100% schema description coverage, the schema already explains that upload_id comes from swiftly_request_upload. The description adds no additional meaning about the identifier's format or lifecycle, 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 and resource ('check the status of a pending upload') and clarifies the outcome ('returns uploaded file details once complete'). It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the closely related siblings swiftly_request_upload, swiftly_process_upload, or swiftly_check_approval, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

Usage is only implied by the word 'pending' – an agent can infer this is a polling call after swiftly_request_upload, but the description never says when to call it, how often, or how it relates to swiftly_process_upload.

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