Get feed status

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility. It does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, has side effects, or any error/rate-limit behavior. The 'get' prefix implies non-mutating but this is not stated explicitly.

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 extremely concise, consisting of two short sentences with no superfluous content. It gets straight to the point without wasting words.

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 tool is simple but lacks essential context: it does not explain how to obtain feedId, what possible statuses exist (beyond DONE), or any error conditions. The mention of resultFeedDocumentId is helpful but incomplete without further details on the response.

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?

The input schema has one parameter (feedId) with zero description coverage, and the description does not compensate. It does not explain what feedId is, where to obtain it, or its format, leaving the agent with insufficient information to correctly supply it.

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?

Clearly states it returns a feed's processing status, with a specific verb and resource. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like get_report, though the feed-specific wording makes the distinction implicit.

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?

Provides only a post-processing hint ('When DONE, use resultFeedDocumentId with download_report-style retrieval') but no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Does not mention conditions like having a feedId from submit_feed or that get_report is for reports, not feeds.

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