Get Lyzr Task Status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, establishing the safe, read-only nature. The description adds value by explaining that the tool returns both status and result when complete, which is not captured in annotations. No contradictions with annotations.

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 directly states the purpose without any fluff. Every word adds value, and it is appropriately concise for the simplicity of the tool.

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 tool's simplicity (one parameter, strong annotations, no output schema), the description is fairly complete. It clarifies the return semantics (status and result) and implies the polling use case. Could be slightly more explicit about the fact that result is only present on completion, but the parenthetical 'when complete' covers it.

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% for the single parameter task_id, with the schema description explicitly stating 'The task_id returned by lyzr_start_task.' The tool description does not need to add further parameter detail, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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's purpose: 'Check the status and (when complete) result of a long-running Lyzr task.' The verb 'Check' specifies the action, and the resource is precisely the task status/result. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like lyzr_start_task (which starts tasks) and other status tools by focusing on Lyzr tasks specifically.

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 task, especially with the parameter description 'The task_id returned by lyzr_start_task', which clearly indicates the workflow. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear and the pairing with lyzr_start_task is obvious.

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