seopass_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. 'Stored in-session' is genuinely useful context, hinting the result is a cached/session-scoped read rather than a live re-computation and that data may be lost across sessions. However, it says nothing about permissions, error behavior, or whether the report is returned as JSON or prose.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the verb and resource come first and nothing is redundant.

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?

For a one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the definition is adequate but thin: it never indicates what the status values or report contain, nor whether the call is safe to repeat. An agent can call it, but cannot set expectations about the response.

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 run_id property already documents that the value comes from seopass_run. The description adds no syntax, format, or constraint details beyond the schema, so the 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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Fetch the stored in-session status and report for a SEOPass run.' An agent can tell it retrieves run state rather than launching one, though it never names the sibling seopass_run that produces the run_id.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: the run_id parameter refers to seopass_run, so the natural workflow (run first, then poll status) is inferable. There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no mention of polling cadence or whether the run must still be in session.

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