syncnology_backup_task_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It indicates a read-only operation via 'Get' and mentions the 'last_result' field, but does not explicitly state the absence of side effects, error handling, or authorization requirements.

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 unnecessary words or repetition. It earns its place entirely.

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 single-parameter status query with an output schema present, the description covers the core purpose. It does not explicitly state read-only behavior or point to list_backup_tasks for obtaining task_ids, but these are minor gaps given the surrounding context.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies that task_id identifies the target task ('by its task_id'), which is somewhat self-evident from the parameter name; it adds little beyond the schema and does not mention where to find the task_id.

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 action ('Get'), the resource ('status of a specific Active Backup for Business task'), and the required identifier ('by its task_id'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like syncnology_list_backup_tasks, which lists all tasks.

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 phrase 'specific Active Backup for Business task by its task_id' implies this tool should be used when a single task's status is needed and the task_id is known. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but 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.