Get Cloudflare Queue

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: rows are never deleted, making this the audit trail, and each row carries per-domain status plus a message.

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?

Three tight sentences, all front-loaded: what it returns, when to call it, and a durability/audit property. No filler, and each sentence adds a distinct piece of information.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully signals the return shape ('per-domain status and message'), and annotations cover the safety profile. It stops short of describing ordering, grouping, or volume of rows, but for a zero-parameter read tool this is close to complete.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the schema carries no parameter semantics to document and the baseline is 4. Nothing is missing on this dimension.

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 ('List'), resource ('every Cloudflare move this account has requested'), and output content ('per-domain status and message'). The account-wide scope cleanly separates it from per-domain siblings like get_cloudflare_domain_status and get_cloudflare_connection.

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?

Explicitly names the triggering workflow: 'Use this to poll progress after connect_domains_to_cloudflare.' That is clear when-to-use guidance, but it offers no when-not-to-use or explicit alternative (e.g., when to prefer get_cloudflare_domain_status for a single domain).

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