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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so 'read-only' is redundant rather than additive. 'Runs straight away' does add a small piece of context (synchronous, no queueing) that isn't in the annotations. It stops short of describing what status values or fields come back, which matters most for a progress-check tool.

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?

A single efficient sentence with the purpose front-loaded. 'Through Royally' is filler that doesn't help an agent decide anything, keeping it from a 5.

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 two-parameter read-only status tool with full annotation coverage and full schema coverage, the description is adequate to invoke correctly. Only the return shape and polling expectations are unaddressed, both minor for a status-check tool without an output schema.

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%, so the id and enum-constrained site_id are already fully documented, and the description adds no parameter-level meaning. Baseline 3 applies when the schema carries the load. The '(site: demo.royalplugins.com)' note merely restates the enum value's site.

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 progress of an in-progress backup'), which is meaningfully narrower than the sibling sv_get_backup or sv_get_backups (which fetch stored backup data). The parenthetical site note adds nothing but the core purpose is unambiguous. Sibling differentiation is implied by 'in-progress' rather than stated explicitly.

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 phrase 'in-progress backup' implies when to use it, but the description never names an alternative tool or states an exclusion (e.g. use sv_get_backup for completed backups). 'Runs straight away' hints at a quick poll but doesn't establish polling guidance or a when-not condition.

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