long_running_task

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only mentions 'async' and 'simulates' but does not disclose critical behavioral traits such as cancellation behavior, error handling, resource consumption, or whether the task runs in the background or blocks.

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?

Single sentence that effectively conveys the core purpose. Could be slightly more structured (e.g., separating purpose from behavior), but it is concise and front-loaded with the key idea.

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?

Tool is simple (2 params, no output schema). The description mentions async behavior but lacks details on return values, error responses, or how the result is retrieved. Given the demo nature, it is adequate but not fully complete.

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 covers both parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description adds no extra semantics beyond 'simulates long-running operation'—it neither explains how taskName relates to the simulation nor provides additional context for durationMs beyond the schema's min/max/default.

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 is an async simulation of a long-running operation, with concrete examples like data processing and report generation. It distinguishes itself from siblings by focusing on async behavior and duration simulation.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like fetch_data or process_order. The description does not specify prerequisites, ideal contexts, or situations where this tool should be avoided.

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