get_swarm_status

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

With no annotations, the description bears full burden. It discloses that the tool is a poller (safe to call repeatedly), returns status with enumerated values, sub_job counts, and a synthesis_job_id. It does not mention rate limits or error handling, but as a read-only getter, the behavioral expectations are sufficiently clear.

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 sentence that front-loads the primary action and efficiently lists all return fields. There is no redundant or unnecessary information; 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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the purpose, input source, and all return fields (goal, status, counts, synthesis_job_id). It could mention potential errors (e.g., invalid swarm_id), but overall it is sufficiently complete for the tool's simplicity.

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 schema has 100% coverage with a clear description for swarm_id. The tool description adds that the ID is 'returned by swarm_task,' which provides helpful context but does not add significant meaning beyond what the schema already offers.

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 action ('Poll the status of a swarm') and the specific resource ('created by swarm_task'). It lists the return fields, including exact status values, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_job_status that operate on individual jobs.

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 the tool—after creating a swarm with swarm_task—and the polling context. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the reference to the sibling tool swarm_task provides clear context.

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