Progress hook

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is partly covered. The description adds nothing about side effects, what the hook does when invoked, or what it returns; it doesn't contradict annotations, but contributes zero behavioral context.

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 short sentence with no wasted words, but this is under-specification rather than conciseness. There is no front-loaded information an agent can act on.

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?

A single-parameter tool with an opaque parameter name, no output schema, and annotations only hinting at open-world non-destructive behavior. The description is far too thin for an agent to call this correctly.

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 single required parameter is named 'd' with no type and 0% schema description coverage. The description says nothing that would explain what 'd' should contain, leaving the agent unable to supply a meaningful value.

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 merely restates the tool name as 'Invoke the progress_hook operation,' adding no verb specificity or resource clarification. It doesn't distinguish this from media_downloader_set_progress_callback or explain what a 'progress hook' does.

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 versus the closely related media_downloader_set_progress_callback, nor any prerequisites or conditions. The agent must infer everything from the name alone.

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