get_document_status

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden. It states the primary action (checking status) and a conditional outcome (get URL if ready), but doesn't disclose side effects, error behavior (e.g., document not found), response format, or whether it's a read-only operation. This is minimal.

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 sentence with no waste. It front-loads the primary action and conditionally adds the secondary outcome, making it concise and easily parsed.

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 simple one-parameter tool, the description covers the main function, but without an output schema or annotations, it leaves gaps: it doesn't explain typical status values, what happens when the document isn't ready, or the response structure. Since the tool is low in complexity, a 3 is appropriate—adequate but not robust.

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 parameter document_id is described as 'The ID of the document to check' in the schema itself. The description adds no additional semantic detail beyond that, so it meets the baseline of 3 for full schema coverage.

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 checks document generation status and retrieves a download URL when ready. It uses a specific verb and resource, and the name is self-explanatory. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like generate_document, but the purpose is unambiguous enough to avoid confusion.

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 you use this to check status but gives no explicit guidance on when to choose this over generate_document or other sibling tools. There is no mention of alternatives or conditional usage, leaving the agent to infer appropriate context.

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