Check crawl job status

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the return contents (done/total/failed) and the relationship to start_crawl, which is useful, but it does not explicitly say whether the call is read-only, how current the data is, or what happens for unknown or expired job 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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It states the return value and the relevant source tool immediately, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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?

For a simple one-parameter status tool with no output schema, the description is largely complete: it names the return fields and the origin of the jobId. It does not repeat the optional omit behavior from the schema, which is acceptable, but it could briefly mention that omitting jobId lists all jobs to be fully self-contained.

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 input schema already fully documents the single jobId parameter, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by linking the jobId to a crawl job started with islamweb_start_crawl, clarifying where the ID comes from and how it should be used beyond the schema's 'omit to list all known jobs' note.

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 the tool returns progress counts (done/total/failed) for a crawl job tied to islamweb_start_crawl, giving a specific verb, resource, and scope. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling islamweb_crawl_stats, though the phrasing implies a job-specific status check rather than aggregate statistics.

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 it: after starting a crawl with islamweb_start_crawl, to check that job's progress. This is clear contextual guidance, but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or point to an alternative like islamweb_crawl_stats for different needs.

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