import_status

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

The description discloses the full status lifecycle, including possible transitions after FINISHED. As a read-only check, it is transparent. However, no mention of auth requirements or rate limits, but these are less critical for a status check.

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?

The description is two sentences plus a short lifecycle list, front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence adds value with no waste.

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?

The description sufficiently explains the returned information (status and summary counts) and lifecycle. Without an output schema, it could be more explicit about the exact response structure, but it is complete enough for a status check tool.

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%, and schema descriptions already indicate the parameters are IDs from list endpoints. The description adds no additional parameter meaning, so baseline 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 it returns a single import's current status and summary with counts, and includes the status lifecycle. This distinguishes it from siblings like imports_list (list all) and import_results (detailed results).

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not specify that this is for checking a specific import's status while imports_list lists all, or that it complements import_wait. Missing usage context.

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