get_slurper_job_progress

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. The verb "Get" reasonably conveys a read-only operation, but the description does not disclose the shape of the progress data, polling behavior, or any side effects. It is not misleading, just 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, clear, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to identifying what the tool does.

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 two-parameter getter, the description plus schema is minimally sufficient to identify and invoke the tool. However, with no output schema and no annotations, it leaves unspecified what the progress response actually contains and how this differs from get_slurper_job, which is a real but not severe gap.

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% because both required parameter descriptions are present, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning to the parameters beyond connecting them to a migration job, but no schema gap exists to compensate for.

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?

Identifies a specific operation ("Get progress") on a specific resource ("migration job"). The word 'progress' distinguishes it from siblings like get_slurper_job and list_slurper_jobs, though it does not explicitly contrast with them.

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 guidance is given about when to use this tool instead of get_slurper_job or list_slurper_jobs, and no prerequisites or discovery steps are mentioned. The intended usage is only implied by the tool name and the generic description.

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