Scan status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds that this retrieves progress, but does not mention response shape, polling behavior, or rate limits, which would be useful context for a status-check tool.

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?

One short sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource, with no filler. It is appropriately sized for a simple status-retrieval tool.

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 one-parameter read-only tool with annotations and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it does not describe what progress information is returned or whether the scan may still be pending, which would help an agent interpret the result.

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 single parameter has 0% schema description coverage, so the schema only says it is a required string called 'id'. The description compensates partially by clarifying it is an on-demand scan id, but does not specify the ID format or where it comes from.

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 states a specific verb ("Get progress") and resource ("on-demand scan id"), so it is clear this checks status rather than starting or listing scans. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like shodan_scans or shodan_scan, leaving some ambiguity for an agent comparing scan-related 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?

The description implies usage by mentioning an on-demand scan id, but gives no explicit guidance on when to call this versus shodan_scans, shodan_scan, or shodan_scan_internet. An agent must infer the selection criteria.

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