Get the status of a specific upload to a threat-intelligence indicator feed by feed ID and upload ID.
Get the status of a specific upload to a threat-intelligence indicator feed by feed ID and upload ID.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| feed_id | Yes | required,The ID of the indicator feed | |
| upload_id | Yes | required,The ID of the feed upload | |
| account_id | Yes | required,The ID of the Cloudflare account |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.3.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether the status includes error details, how long statuses are retained, authentication requirements, or rate limits. Limited to a simple functional statement.
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, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words, making it efficient and easy to parse.
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?
Given the tool's complexity (3 required parameters) and lack of annotations or output schema, the description is minimal. It states what the tool does but does not provide sufficient contextual details about return values, error handling, or usage scenarios.
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 100%, with each parameter documented in the schema. The description does not add meaning beyond what the schema provides; baseline 3 is appropriate when schema covers all parameters.
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 verb (Get) and resource (status of a specific upload to a threat-intelligence indicator feed), specifying the identifiers (feed ID and upload ID). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_indicator_feed or list_indicator_feeds by focusing on upload status.
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 usage for checking upload status but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_indicator_feed_data or list_indicator_feeds. No when-not-to-use guidance is provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.