peaka_get_metadata_refresh_status

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true. The description adds value by enumerating the possible statuses (e.g., COMPLETED, FAILED) that the tool can return, helping the agent understand expected outcomes. No contradictions.

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?

Two short paragraphs: first states purpose and statuses, second gives usage guideline. Every sentence is essential. Front-loaded with purpose.

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 status check tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, statuses, and a key precondition (projectId). Could mention what happens if no job exists, but overall adequate given low complexity.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters. The tool description does not add new meaning beyond what is in the schema property descriptions.

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 verb ('Check') and resource ('metadata refresh job for a specific catalog'), and lists possible statuses. It is distinct from sibling tools that handle queries, caches, or other operations.

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?

Provides explicit instruction on when to call peaka_list_projects first if projectId is unknown, and tells the agent to remember the chosen projectId. This gives a clear when-to-use and a concrete alternative.

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