pagesift_crawl_statusMonitor the status and progress of your PageSift crawl or batch scrape job. View the list of pages collected so far by providing the job ID.
Get the status, progress and pages collected so far for a crawl or batch scrape job. Read-only.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Job id returned by pagesift_crawl or pagesift_batch_scrape. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.81.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so 'Read-only' in the description adds nothing. What it does add beyond annotations is the shape of the result — status, progress, pages collected — which is useful given there is no output schema. It does not say what the status values mean or how completion is signalled.
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, front-loaded with the verb and resource. The trailing 'Read-only' clause is redundant with annotations and is the only wasted fragment.
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?
For a single-parameter polling tool with no output schema, the description covers what the call returns (status, progress, collected pages) adequately. Missing are the meaning of status values and what the agent should do on completion, which would help an agent drive a crawl loop.
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 parameter with 100% schema description coverage, and the schema already explains that 'id' is the job id returned by pagesift_crawl or pagesift_batch_scrape. The description adds no further meaning, 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 ('Get the status, progress and pages collected') and a specific resource (a crawl or batch scrape job), and scopes it to jobs produced by the two job-creating siblings. An agent can distinguish it from pagesift_crawl and pagesift_batch_scrape without opening any schema.
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?
Usage is implied by the resource: poll this after starting a crawl or batch scrape. There is no explicit statement of when to use it versus re-calling the creating tool, no guidance on polling cadence, and no mention of terminal states.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.