Check Rapid7 Export Status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful context beyond annotations by specifying it is a fast, non-blocking call that queries the API once and does not poll or wait, which clarifies the operational behavior.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the purpose and followed by the key non-polling behavior. Every word earns its place and there is no redundant content.

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?

The tool is simple: one parameter, full schema coverage, rich annotations, and an output schema present. The description adds the crucial behavioral guarantee of non-polling. Nothing material is missing for an agent to select and invoke this tool correctly.

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%, so the sole parameter export_id is already fully documented in the schema. The tool description does not add additional parameter meaning, but the baseline of 3 is appropriate when the schema carries the full load.

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 specific verb and resource: 'Check the current status of a Rapid7 export job.' It clearly differentiates itself from sibling tools by emphasizing this is a status check and by noting 'Does NOT poll or wait,' which distinguishes it from any waiting/polling or export-starting workflow.

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 implies when to use this tool: when you need the current status without blocking or waiting. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state conditions for when not to use it, such as 'if you need to wait for completion, use start_rapid7_export' or 'use download_rapid7_export when ready.'

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