查询下载任务

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds the session-scoping behavior of the listing mode, but omits polling semantics, terminal/failure states, and how long results persist — all relevant for an async download status tool.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and followed by the mode-switching behavior. No filler.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description does name what's returned (progress plus result file path), which is the most important thing. But it doesn't cover failure states, job expiration, or the polling/waiting pattern an agent needs for a 0-90s wait parameter, leaving meaningful gaps for an async task tool.

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 50%: wait_seconds is documented in the schema itself, but job_id has no schema description. The description partially compensates by explaining that omitting job_id lists all session tasks, which is the key semantic for that parameter. Baseline 3 fits given the schema already carries the wait_seconds documentation.

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+resource: querying download task progress and the resulting file path. It's clearly distinct from bili_download (which starts a download), though the differentiation is implied rather than stated by name.

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 explains one usage mode: omitting job_id lists all tasks in the current session, which is real guidance for choosing between the two call shapes. However, it doesn't say when to use this rather than bili_download, or when to poll vs. use wait_seconds — that's left to inference.

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