getTaxReportStatus

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

Annotations declare openWorldHint=true, destructiveHint=true, and readOnlyHint=false, which is unusual for a 'status' tool; the description's 'Internal logic' note about real-time big-data queries and synchronizing a local record help explain the non-read-only mutation, adding value beyond the annotations. It still doesn't state permissions or rate-limit behavior.

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?

Front-loaded purpose sentence followed by a scannable status-value table and one internal-logic note. Well organized; the internal-logic paragraph is slightly more than strictly needed but earns its place by explaining default vs. real-time behavior.

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?

With no output schema, the enumeration of status codes -1/0/1/2/3 is exactly the return-value context an agent needs. The main gap is that the lone input parameter remains unexplained, but the behavioral and return surfaces are well covered.

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?

There is 1 parameter (queryId) at 0% schema description coverage, and the description says nothing about it—no format, no origin, no relation to createTaxReport/batchCreateTaxReports outputs. With an undocumented required parameter, the description fails to compensate.

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+resource ('Query the generation status of a specified tax report file task') that clearly distinguishes it from siblings like createTaxReport, batchQueryTaxReports, and getTaxReportUrl. An agent can tell what this returns without opening the 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 embedded in the status table: status 2 points to the Url endpoint for the download link, and status 3 says the task must be re-created. This gives clear conditional next steps, though it never names sibling tools explicitly or states when-not to use it.

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