Delivery: task status [sandbox]

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

Annotations already mark it as readOnly and idempotent. The description adds value by enumerating possible statuses (processing, success, error) and typical processing time (5–20 minutes). No contradictions.

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?

Three short, front-loaded sentences with zero waste. The [SANDBOX] tag and purpose are immediately clear.

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 simple status-check tool with one parameter, the description covers purpose, source of taskID, expected statuses, timing, and audience. Missing details about error format or pagination are not critical given no output schema.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description mentions taskID comes from upload operations, but the schema already documents it as a path parameter with type details. No additional semantic enrichment.

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 specifically states it returns the status of an asynchronous task by taskID, naming the source operations (upload of sorting centers, tags, etc.). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like delivery_create_* or delivery_add_*.

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?

It explicitly limits use to 'delivery-service partners only' and indicates it's for polling after upload operations. While it doesn't list when not to use, the context and sibling list make it clear this is a status-check tool, not for creation.

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