get_extraction_status

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

No annotations provided. The description compensates by disclosing the status values (queued/running/completed/failed) and that it includes timestamps and error messages. It does not indicate any side effects or destructive behavior.

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 sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: definition of output and usage advice. No redundant words. Highly efficient.

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 simplicity of the tool (one param, no output schema), the description fully covers what it does, what it returns, and when to use it. No gaps.

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 coverage is 100% for the single parameter 'doc_id', with a clear description. The tool description does not add further semantic detail about the parameter beyond what the schema provides. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 the resource 'entity extraction status for a document.' It also lists what it shows: existence, job status, timestamps, errors. It distinguishes from siblings by positioning it as a prerequisite check before querying entities.

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?

Explicitly advises when to use: 'Use this to check if extraction is complete before querying entities.' This provides clear context. No explicit 'when not to use' but the positive use case is well-defined.

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