get_print_progress

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, yet it says nothing about read-only semantics, permissions, polling expectations, or how the 'default' printer is resolved. The verb 'Obtiene' weakly implies a read, but nothing else about behavior is conveyed.

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 and nothing buried, but the brevity here reflects under-specification rather than disciplined conciseness. Structure is fine for the size, yet the size is inadequate for the tool's complexity.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. However, with zero annotation coverage and zero parameter documentation, the definition leaves the read-only nature, the printer parameter, and any sibling distinction entirely to inference.

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 description coverage is 0% and the description mentions no parameter at all. The single 'printer' parameter with default 'default' gets no explanation of what value it accepts, whether it is a name/index, or what happens when omitted.

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 "Obtiene progreso de impresión" is a direct restatement of the tool name get_print_progress in another language, adding no distinguishing detail. It does not differentiate this tool from close siblings such as get_printer_status or get_klippy_log, so an agent gets essentially nothing beyond the name itself.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisite, and no mention of when to prefer get_printer_status or any other sibling. The agent must infer the entire usage context 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.