get_index_status

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It transparently details the returned information (database location, running status, item counts, progress), indicating a read-only operation. However, it does not mention authentication requirements or rate limits, which would enhance transparency.

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 concise, front-loading the core action and then bullet-listing return information. Every sentence contributes meaning without redundancy or fluff.

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 no parameters and an output schema that presumably details the return structure, the description is complete. It lists all relevant return fields and the purpose, making further elaboration unnecessary.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the description provides rich context about what the tool returns, adding value beyond the empty input schema. The baseline for 0 parameters is 4, but the detailed list of return fields elevates scoring to 5.

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 tool gets the current status of the index and ongoing indexing operations, using a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('index status'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like search_odoo_index or list_modules by focusing solely on index status, not search or listing details.

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 for checking index status but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., for progress monitoring vs. searching items). No exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance is provided, leaving the agent to infer context.

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