cursor_agent_check

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It states 'poll status/output', which suggests a read operation, but does not disclose whether the tool is blocking, can be called multiple times, or any other behavioral traits like rate limits or pagination.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that efficiently communicates the tool's purpose with zero wasted words.

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 output schema, the description does not specify the format or fields of the status/output. It is adequate for a simple poll but incomplete for an agent to understand response structure or termination conditions.

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, the description adds no meaning beyond the schema. It does not explain what job_id refers to or what the 'full' boolean parameter does. The agent must infer from the tool name and context.

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 polls status/output of a job from cursor_agent_start, using specific verb and resource, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like cursor_agent_start (which starts jobs) and cursor_agent_cancel (which cancels).

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 after starting a job with cursor_agent_start, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide any when-not-to-use guidance.

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