Datamanager.Request Status

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Retrieve' implies a read, but nothing states permission requirements, rate limits, eventual-consistency of status, or whether request_ids expire. The cryptic '(optional read backend)' suggests a backend choice but never explains it.

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 front-loaded sentence with the verb and resource up front. The parenthetical is the only wasted/confusing fragment, so it is efficient but not flawless.

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?

An output schema means return values needn't be described, and the tool is a simple single-parameter read. However, without annotations the description omits when to call it and where request_id comes from, leaving meaningful gaps for an agent to fill by guessing.

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 the single parameter (request_id) has no schema description. The description only hints that the id refers to an ingestion request; it adds no format, provenance (which sibling tool returns it), or validity detail to compensate for the coverage gap.

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 (Retrieve) and resource (a Data Manager ingestion request's status), which is clear enough for an agent to know it's a point-read of a request. It does not distinguish itself from the sibling datamanager.status, and the trailing '(optional read backend)' is ambiguous jargon rather than disambiguation.

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 guidance on when to use this versus datamanager.status or the upload tools that likely produce the request_id. There are no prerequisites, exclusions, or trigger conditions, leaving usage entirely to inference.

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