collector_run_status

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It explicitly states the operation is a 'fetch', implying a read-only, non-destructive behavior. It does not disclose response format or edge cases, but the simple nature of the operation and the clear 'fetch' wording provide sufficient transparency for an agent.

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, front-loaded sentence with zero filler. It immediately states what the tool does and how, leaving no wasted words. It earns full marks for conciseness and clarity.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema) and the absence of annotations, the description provides all essential information: what it fetches, what it returns (run and delivered rows), and how to identify the run. Nothing critical is missing for a tool of this scope.

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%, so runId is already documented. The description adds value by specifying that the run_id is the one returned by run_collector, establishing the provenance and correct value source. This extra context meaningfully aids correct invocation 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 clearly states the specific action (fetch), the resource (one Collector run and its delivered rows), and the method (by run_id). This distinguishes it from siblings like crawl_status and run_collector, making its purpose unambiguous without needing to open the schema.

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 usage context through the parameter note 'returned by run_collector', signaling this is meant to be called after run_collector to retrieve results. It does not explicitly list alternatives or when-not-to-use scenarios, but for a simple status-like fetch the implicit linkage is adequate.

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