openvsp.batch_status

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

The description discloses that it opens or creates .batch.lock to check runner ownership, and that it reports interrupted when a saved running batch has no owner. This adds context beyond the annotations (idempotentHint, destructiveHint) about side effects on the lock file, though it does not detail the lock file's exact behavior or permissions.

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 concise and front-loaded, starting with the core purpose, then side effects, then the explicit instruction to use batch_resume. Every sentence serves a purpose, though it could be slightly more concise by merging the lock file and owner check details.

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 that there is an output schema and the schema covers all parameters, the description provides sufficient context for an agent to call this tool correctly. It explains the key behavior around .batch.lock and the interrupted state, and directs to batch_resume for recovery. Minor gap: it doesn't explicitly state that the tool is safe to call repeatedly (though idempotentHint is true).

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 covers all parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), including pagination bounds and the requirement for the batch directory to exist. The description adds the note about the lock file, but the parameter semantics are adequately covered by the schema, so a baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 that the tool reads batch status, counts, and a paginated case summary, and explicitly notes that it does not rewrite batch.json or run a solver. It distinguishes itself from batch_resume, a sibling tool, by mentioning the 'running batch has no owner' scenario.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool (to read status) and when not to run a solver, and it directs users to use openvsp.batch_resume explicitly to retry interrupted batches. This provides clear guidance on alternatives.

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