Delivery: task status [sandbox]

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds valuable behavioral context: processing takes 5–20 minutes and lists possible statuses. This goes beyond the annotations without contradiction.

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 front-loaded sentences. Every sentence adds essential information: the core function, statuses, time estimate, and audience. No wasted 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?

For a simple one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is complete. It covers purpose, parameter source, status values, time expectation, and sandbox restriction (via title and description). All necessary information for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly is present.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, the baseline is 3. The description reinforces that the task_id comes from upload operations, but the schema already describes it as from an async operation response. The added specifics (sorting centers, etc.) provide marginal extra value.

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 it returns the status of an asynchronous task by taskID, with specific statuses listed. The verb 'Returns' and the resource 'status of an asynchronous task' are well-defined, and it distinguishes itself from sibling tools that perform other delivery operations.

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 explicitly limits usage to delivery-service partners and specifies that the taskID comes from upload operations (sorting centers, tags, areas, terms, tariff). It implies when to use it (after such uploads) but does not explicitly mention when not to use it, though the context is clear.

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