agency-hosting_listRunningAgencyPlanWebsiteProcessesV1

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility. It explains the fields (ID, type, status) and suggests polling behavior, but omits details about pagination, rate limits, response format, or error conditions. The transparency is adequate but not comprehensive.

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: two short paragraphs, front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence, followed by supporting details and usage guidance. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 list tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the basics (what is listed, key fields, usage scenario). However, it lacks details about the return structure (e.g., is it an array? any additional fields?), which is a gap 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?

The input schema has one parameter (website_uid) with 100% description coverage via the schema's own description 'Agency Plan website UID'. The description adds no additional meaning for this parameter, so 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 lists 'active and recently completed asynchronous processes' for an Agency Plan website, specifying the verb 'lists', the resource 'processes', and the scope. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like getAgencyPlanWebsiteSetupStatus, but the purpose is clear and specific.

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 tells agents to 'Poll this endpoint after initiating async operations (SSL setup, backups, cloning) to track progress.' This provides clear guidance on when to use the tool, though it does not mention alternatives or exclusion cases.

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