seopass_status

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

No annotations provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It does not indicate whether the tool is read-only, has side effects, or describes the nature of the status (e.g., polling, completion). The cryptic note about 'persistence lands later' is unhelpful.

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 first sentence is concise, but the second sentence ('Chunk 1 reserves the tool shape; persistence lands later') is cryptic and wastes characters. It should be removed or clarified.

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?

Despite sibling tools like seopass_run and copypass_status, the description fails to explain what status means (e.g., possible values, polling behavior) or what the return format is (no output schema). The description is incomplete for an agent to use effectively.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% and the description adds value by stating the run_id comes from a future seopass_run execution path, providing context beyond the schema. This meets the baseline expectation.

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 first sentence 'Fetch the status for a SEOPass run' clearly states the verb (fetch) and resource (status of a SEOPass run), distinguishing it from 'seopass_run' which initiates a run. However, the second sentence introduces confusing developer notes.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., copypass_status, legalpass_run). No mention of prerequisites or context. The description is silent on usage conditions.

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