get-launch-progress

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

With no annotations, the description must stand alone. It reveals that the tool returns completion status and test counts, but omits any mention of side effects, rate limits, or required permissions. Since it is a read operation, behavior is mostly implied.

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?

Two sentences that efficiently convey purpose and usage. No redundant or unnecessary text; every sentence earns its place.

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?

Adequate given the simple parameter set and lack of output schema. However, the description could mention the return format (e.g., object with fields) and potential error cases, which would improve completeness.

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?

Only one parameter ('id') exists, and its schema description ('Launch ID') is complete. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 applies.

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 retrieves execution progress of a launch, specifically whether it has finished and test status counts. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get-launch' or 'list-launches' by focusing on progress tracking.

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?

Explicitly advises using it to differentiate a still-running launch from a completed one. However, it does not mention when not to use it or direct to alternatives for detailed results.

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