task_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the completion signal (a "finished" timestamp is present only when done), which is genuine behavioral value, but it omits error/failed/cancelled states, whether results are retained or expire, and what the call returns besides that timestamp.

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?

Two short sentences, zero filler, with the resource identity front-loaded and the completion-semantics detail immediately after. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description must carry the whole contract, and it only covers the finished/not-finished distinction. For a polling tool an agent needs to know the other possible states and the full return shape, which are absent, though the core completion check is adequately conveyed.

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?

Only one parameter and schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already explains that task_id comes from backup_dataset or compact_dataset. The description adds no syntax, format, or validity details beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific resource (background task state) and explicitly scopes it to tasks created by backup_dataset or compact_dataset, which routes the agent away from the other dataset/graph siblings. An agent can immediately tell this is a task-introspection tool, not a dataset query.

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?

Usage is only implied: the mention of backup_dataset and compact_dataset suggests this is called after those operations to check progress, but it never says when to poll, how often, or that it is the only way to observe those long-running operations. No alternatives exist among siblings, so there is nothing to exclude.

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