ios_task_status

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes that this is a safe, non-mutating read. The description adds that the return payload includes 'latest steps' and that omitting task_id returns all tasks, which is useful since there is no output schema, but it says nothing about ordering, volume, or limits on the list-all mode.

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 semicolon-joined sentence that front-loads the primary behavior and immediately qualifies the optional parameter. No filler, nothing 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?

For a one-optional-parameter read tool with a readOnly annotation, the description covers purpose, both operating modes, and the shape of the result despite the absence of an output schema. The remaining gap is provenance of task_id and any bound on the listing mode.

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% and task_id has no description in the schema, so the description must carry the meaning — and it does, by explaining the omitted/null default behavior (list all tasks). What it omits is where a task_id comes from or its format, preventing a top score.

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?

Names a specific resource (an agent task) and states exactly what is returned: status plus latest steps. It also covers the dual retrieval mode, so an agent can tell it apart from the mutating siblings ios_run_task and ios_task_cancel, though it does not name them 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 clause 'without task_id, a list of all tasks' gives an explicit condition for choosing between the single-task and list modes, which is real usage guidance. However, it never states when to prefer this over ios_run_task (to check progress after starting) or ios_task_cancel, leaving sibling routing to inference.

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