App Task Status

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It never states this is a read-only query, whether it returns completion state or must be polled repeatedly, or how a finished/failed task is reported — all relevant for a progress-checking tool.

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?

A single compact sentence that front-loads the verb and resource. No filler, though it is arguably too terse to carry the needed usage context.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the schema fully documents parameters. However the description omits the operational context (polling pattern, relationship to app_install/app_task_cancel) that an agent needs to invoke it correctly.

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%, so host/port/scheme/profile/task_id are all documented in the schema with their own descriptions. The description adds nothing beyond what the schema already provides, 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 verb (查询/query) and resource (应用任务进度/app task progress) and scopes it to install/update/uninstall tasks. This distinguishes it from app_status (running state) and app_list, though it doesn't name a sibling explicitly.

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?

No guidance on when to use this instead of app_status, app_task_action, or app_task_cancel. It doesn't mention that this is the polling companion to app_install/app_update, or where the task_id comes from.

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