Plecs Task

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so read-only safety is covered by structured data. The description adds only that the response includes status and elapsed time — modest value beyond the annotation, with nothing about what statuses exist or what happens if task_id is unknown.

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 with no filler, front-loading the essential function. It is terse rather than padded, which suits a simple one-parameter read, though the terseness contributes to the gaps elsewhere.

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, but for a tool sitting among three other task-related siblings the description should at least clarify its distinct role and what task_id refers to. Neither is present, so an agent has an incomplete picture for correct selection and invocation.

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?

One required parameter with 0% schema description coverage, and the description says nothing about task_id — where it comes from (presumably a submit response) or its format. With low coverage the description should compensate, and it does not.

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 verb-ish purpose ('Status/elapsed time') for a clear resource ('background task'), so an agent knows roughly what it retrieves. But it does not distinguish this from sibling tools like plecs_task_result, plecs_tasks, or plecs_submit, which occupy adjacent ground, leaving ambiguity about which to call.

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 indication of when to use this versus plecs_task_result or plecs_tasks, no mention of prerequisites (e.g. does the task need to be submitted first?), and no exclusions. The agent must infer routing from the name alone.

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