firecrawl_check_crawl_status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows it's a safe query. The description adds that it returns 'Status and progress of the crawl job, including results if available,' which is helpful but does not cover error states or rate limits.

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 short and to the point: one sentence for purpose, a code example, and a note on return. Every element adds value, and the key information is front-loaded. No unnecessary 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (1 param, no output schema), the description covers the basics. However, it omits where the 'id' comes from (a crawl job), potential error scenarios, and full return structure. Sibling tools like firecrawl_crawl imply the source, but it's not explicit.

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 schema description coverage at 0%, the description fails to explain the 'id' parameter beyond the schema's type string. The usage example shows a UUID but does not state that it must be a valid crawl job ID from a previous firecrawl_crawl call. The only parameter is left ambiguous.

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 'Check the status of a crawl job' with a specific verb and resource. The usage example reinforces the purpose, and it distinguishes itself from siblings like firecrawl_crawl (starts a crawl) and other unrelated tools.

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 a usage example showing the 'id' parameter, implying it's used after a crawl job is started. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs siblings (e.g., firecrawl_agent_status) or when not to use it. No prerequisites or alternatives are mentioned.

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