pennylane_get_fec_export

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false), so the description's real value is the extra behavioral detail it adds: the three status values and, critically, that the download URL expires in 10 minutes. That expiry constraint is non-obvious and materially affects how an agent should act.

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, outcome-oriented and front-loaded: what it returns first, then the time-sensitive caveat. No filler.

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 an output schema present, the description need not enumerate return fields, and annotations cover safety. The added status/expiry detail makes it self-sufficient for a single-param read tool, though a hint about polling cadence or the create-then-get workflow would complete it.

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% and the single 'id' parameter is already documented as 'Identifiant de l'export FEC.' The description adds no format or source guidance for the id, so the schema carries the load and 3 is the correct baseline.

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 verb and resource ('Récupère le détail d'un export FEC'), so an agent can immediately tell it apart from the sibling pennylane_create_fec_export. It also summarizes the payload (status + download URL), though it does not explicitly name the sibling it is not.

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 mention of a pending/ready/error status implicitly signals a polling use case after pennylane_create_fec_export, but no when-to-use, prerequisites, or alternative is stated explicitly. Usage is inferred rather than guided.

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