get_scraping_status

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

No annotations are provided. The description mentions 'worker runs automatically' hinting at background behavior but lacks details on read-only nature, rate limits, or what constitutes 'active and recent'. The schema description adds some context but the tool description itself is minimal.

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 a single sentence with verb and resource, no redundant words. It is front-loaded and efficient, though slightly sparse.

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?

No output schema is provided, and the description does not explain what the response contains (e.g., fields like active_jobs, history). For a monitoring tool, this omission leaves the agent underinformed about expected results.

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?

Input schema has 2 parameters with descriptions, and schema description coverage is 100%. The tool description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score of 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?

The description clearly states 'Get status of active and recent scraping jobs', specifying the verb (get) and resource (status of scraping jobs). It distinguishes from siblings like 'cancel_scrape_job' (different action) and 'scrape_content' (different purpose).

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?

The description implies usage for monitoring scraping progress, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_job_status' (if existed) or 'list_jobs'. No guidance on exclusions or prerequisites.

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