scan_buckets_status

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

Beyond annotations (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), the description adds operator-deploy restriction and degradation behavior when unprovisioned, providing significant behavioral context not captured in annotations.

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 compact: two sentences covering purpose, usage constraints, and return data. No unnecessary words, front-loaded with the main action.

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?

For a simple polling tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description covers purpose, usage restrictions, degradation behavior, and return structure comprehensively. No gaps given the simplicity.

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 schema has 0% coverage, but the description mentions 'by scanId', confirming the parameter's role. However, it does not specify where the scanId comes from or its format beyond what's in the schema, so minimal added 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 clearly states it polls the status of a cloud-bucket discovery scan by scanId, returning scan status and progress metadata. It distinguishes from sibling tools like scan_buckets_start and scan_buckets_findings by specifying it is a status check.

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 specifies it is operator-deploy only and degrades when unprovisioned, indicating who should use it and behavior under certain conditions. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use, but the purpose makes it clear it is for polling after initiating a scan.

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