ecp_storage_bd_job_status

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does imply a read-only status query ('Check whether'), which is useful, but it does not state the shape of the result (boolean, status text, list), whether the call is asynchronous, or if there are any side effects. This is adequate but not rich.

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?

One sentence, no filler, and the key scoping ('storage.bd backup/restore job' and 'currently running') is front-loaded. Every word earns its place.

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 zero-parameter, read-only status tool the description is nearly sufficient. However, with no output schema it does not mention what the agent should expect as a return value (e.g., true/false, status enum, duration). It also doesn't indicate how this status relates to the backup/restore lifecycle tools, which would help an agent decide when to poll.

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 has zero parameters and schema coverage is effectively 100%. The baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description correctly does not attempt to document nonexistent parameters. No additional meaning is needed here.

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 names a specific verb ('Check') and resource ('whether a storage.bd backup/restore job is currently running for this account'). This is clearly distinct from sibling tools like ecp_storage_bd_get_config, ecp_backup_list_snapshots, or the various database backup/restore tools, so an agent can tell what this tool does without ambiguity.

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 gives no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not say to invoke it after a backup/restore was initiated, nor does it point to sibling tools like ecp_backup_list_snapshots for listing snapshots or ecp_storage_bd_set_config for configuration. Context is only implied by the verb 'check'.

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