seopass_status

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

The description only says 'Fetch the status', which is a read operation, but offers no details about side effects, idempotency, or what the status response contains. The cryptic second sentence suggests the tool may be incomplete, further reducing 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 first sentence is clear, but the second sentence is cryptic and unhelpful, adding confusion without earning its place. The description could be more concise and focused.

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 the lack of output schema, annotations, and nested objects, the description should provide more context about the status response and potential errors. It fails to give a complete picture, especially with the placeholder note.

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%, so the schema already documents the run_id parameter. The description adds no extra semantic value beyond what the schema provides.

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 fetches the status of a SEOPass run, distinguishing it from siblings like seopass_run. However, the cryptic second sentence 'Chunk 1 reserves the tool shape; persistence lands later.' introduces ambiguity about the tool's readiness and purpose.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The parameter description hints that run_id comes from seopass_run, but the description itself does not state prerequisites or contrast with sibling tools like seopass_run.

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