get_upload_record_v1

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It states 'checks the status' but does not disclose behavior for invalid record IDs, side effects, or response structure beyond a vague 'dictionary.' Read-only nature is implied but not confirmed.

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?

Description is very short (three lines) and follows a standard docstring format. It is concise but sacrifices completeness for brevity, which is borderline acceptable for a simple tool.

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 exists, yet the description only says 'A dictionary containing the upload status information' without specifying keys or possible values. Missing details on error handling and edge cases make it incomplete for reliable agent use.

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?

Only parameter record_id is described as 'The upload record ID' in the Args section, adding basic meaning beyond the schema's empty string type. However, with 0% schema coverage, more detail (e.g., format, origin) would be helpful.

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?

Description states 'Checks the status of a V1 map upload,' which clearly identifies the action and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like upload_robot_map_v1, but could be more specific about what 'status' entails.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., upload_robot_map_v1). The context of sibling tools suggests it is used after an upload, but this is not explicitly stated.

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