get_cell_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions 'best-effort', hinting at potential incompleteness or reliability issues, but does not elaborate on side effects, permissions, or the meaning of execution status. This is minimal for a read operation with no annotations.

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?

The description is a single sentence that presents the core purpose immediately. Every word earns its place, and there is no extraneous information. It is appropriately concise.

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?

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description leaves many gaps: what does execution status look like (e.g., states like queued, running, completed)? What does 'best-effort' imply about reliability? How does includeOutputs affect the output? The description is too sparse to fully inform tool invocation.

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?

The description mentions 'selected cells or all cells', which indirectly explains the cellIds parameter (if provided, selected; if empty, all). However, the includeOutputs parameter is not explained, and with 0% schema description coverage, the description does not fully compensate for the missing parameter documentation.

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?

The description clearly states that the tool returns execution status for selected cells or all cells. The verb 'Returns' and resource 'execution status' are specific, and the scope 'selected cells or all cells' distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_cell (which returns cell content) or read_cell_outputs (which returns outputs).

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus its siblings (e.g., get_cell, get_cells, read_cell_outputs). There is no mention of prerequisites, typical use cases, or alternatives, leaving the agent to infer context from the name alone.

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