get_manga_progress

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states 'query the progress' without disclosing whether the operation is read-only, idempotent, or what the response format might be. More detail on behavior (e.g., polling semantics) is needed.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. Every part is informative.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is adequate but could be more complete. It doesn't describe the return value structure, possible statuses, or error cases, which would help an agent interpret results.

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?

The schema covers the parameter with a description that matches the tool's description. The tool description adds context that the task_id comes from the comic content interface, but this adds minimal value. With 100% schema coverage, baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 the tool queries progress of a manga download task using a task ID. It specifies the source (comic content interface), which distinguishes it from sibling tools that retrieve content or other data.

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 implies usage when a task ID is available from the comic content interface, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_content or get_chapter_content. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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