firecrawl_check_crawl_status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that it returns status/progress and results, but does not discuss error handling, rate limits, or behavior for invalid IDs.

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 short and front-loaded with the purpose. The usage example and return note are useful but add length. Could be slightly more concise, but overall efficient.

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?

Missing context about how to obtain the crawl job ID, possible status values, and error scenarios. For a tool with 1 parameter and no output schema, it should explain these details for reliable agent use.

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?

Only parameter 'id' has no description in schema (0% coverage). The description does not explain what 'id' refers to (the crawl job ID) or how to obtain it. The usage example shows a UUID but provides no context.

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?

Clearly states 'Check the status of a crawl job' with a specific verb and resource. Distinguishes from siblings like firecrawl_crawl (starts a crawl) and firecrawl_agent_status (checks agent status).

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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. Does not mention that it should be used after starting a crawl with firecrawl_crawl or differentiate from other status tools like firecrawl_agent_status.

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