fetch_status_text

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It signals a read-only lookup via 'Check' and names fetchStatus, but it does not disclose what the response looks like, whether it can return empty results, error behavior, or any authorization requirements.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the purpose and an actionable input hint. No filler or redundant restructuring of the schema.

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?

The tool is simple and its schema fully documents the parameter, but with no output schema and no annotations the description should say more about expected return values and edge cases. It is usable but leaves gaps an agent must infer.

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 schema already documents the single jids parameter with format examples and min/max constraints (100% coverage). The description only repeats that phone numbers or JIDs are accepted, so it adds little beyond the schema.

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 identifies a specific verb ('Check') and resource ('contact About/status text') and even names the underlying operation ('fetchStatus'). It is clear, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling list_status, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

Usage is implied: call this when you need a contact's About/status text, supplying phone numbers or JIDs. However, there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance or comparison with alternatives such as list_status, post_status, or delete_status.

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