Poll Task Status

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds valuable context: cheap performance, safety for frequent calls, and that it never throws on unknown IDs. This goes beyond the annotations.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the purpose. Every sentence provides essential information 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?

Given the tool's simplicity and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the return values, safety, error handling (notFound), and performance. It is complete for a polling tool.

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 describes tailLines (with description and constraints) but not taskId. The description does not add meaning for taskId (e.g., format uuid) and only loosely references 'recent tail' without detailing tailLines. With 50% schema coverage, the description fails to compensate for the undocumented taskId parameter.

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 current status, duration, and the recent tail of streamed output for a task. It uses specific verbs and resources, distinguishing itself from siblings like get_task_result by emphasizing its cheap and safe nature for frequent polling.

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?

It explicitly advises that the tool is cheap and safe to call frequently, guiding usage for polling. It also clarifies that notFound:true is returned for unknown/pruned IDs (never throws). However, it does not explicitly state when to use alternatives like get_task_result for final results.

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