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

Goes well beyond the readOnlyHint annotation by disclosing the per-state payload shape: size/compression and presigned URL when done, error reason when failed. It also surfaces the non-obvious expiry behavior (~24 h from dump start, null once expired), which an agent could not infer from any structured field.

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 compact sentences, each carrying distinct information: purpose and status enum first, then the done payload with expiry semantics, then the failed payload and the polling trigger. Nothing is redundant.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description does effectively document return values per status, so the main burden is met. The only residual gap is how to obtain the 'dump' identifier and whether statuses transition, which is minor for a one-parameter polling 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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the parameter meaning. It implies the single 'dump' argument identifies a database_dump job (and is obtained from database_dump output), but never states the expected format or explicitly names the field. Partial compensation for the coverage gap.

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 ('Report one database_dump job') and enumerates the exact status domain (pending|running|done|failed). It also implicitly separates this read-only status check from the sibling mutating tool database_dump by naming the relationship between them.

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 an explicit trigger ('Poll this after database_dump returns status=running (large dumps)') and an explicit remediation path when the URL has expired ('request a new dump'). An agent knows both when to call it and what to do with the null result.

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