get_scan_status

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

Description adds behavioral context ('from checkpoints', 'without connecting to IMAP') beyond annotations (readOnly, idempotent), clarifying that it shows cached progress rather than live data. No contradiction.

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?

Single sentence, no waste, front-loaded with key action and scope.

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?

No output schema, minimal parameter guidance. Description is adequate for a simple tool but lacks detail on what 'scan progress' entails or output format.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, description should compensate but does not explain the 'account' parameter's role in filtering per folder, leaving its purpose vague.

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?

Description clearly states the tool shows scan progress per folder from checkpoints and explicitly notes it does not connect to IMAP, which distinguishes it from siblings like get_scan_job and start_scan_job.

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 'without connecting to IMAP' implies a lightweight status check, but no explicit when-to-use or alternative comparisons are provided.

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