knowledge_base_get_crawling_status_for_latest_operation

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds only that it is for the 'latest operation' but does not disclose error behavior, response format, or what happens when no operation exists. With annotations covering safety, the description's marginal behavioral context is minimal but not contradictory.

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, succinct sentence with no redundant phrasing. It directly states the action and target, achieving maximum conciseness without fluff.

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 there is no output schema, the description does not explain what the crawling status will look like or what values are possible. It also leaves 'latest operation' ambiguous—does it require the operationId of the latest operation or does it infer it? For a read-only getter, this minimalism is acceptable but lacks important detail about the expected response and semantics.

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%, meaning each parameter (operationId, knowledgeBaseId, locationId) is already described in the schema. The description does not add any clarification about parameter relationships or how 'latest' relates to the provided operationId, so it provides no extra semantic value beyond the schema.

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 states a clear verb ('Get') and a resource ('crawling status'), and it is distinct from the sibling knowledge_base_get_knowledge_base_by_id tool, which retrieves the knowledge base itself. However, 'latest operation' is somewhat vague and does not explicitly clarify that it refers to the most recent crawl operation for the given knowledge base, leaving room for interpretation.

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 alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites or conditions. There is no explicit 'use this when...' or 'for X, use Y instead' wording, 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.