sophos_get_detections_query_status

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

With no annotations, the description bears full burden. It discloses polling behavior and outcome statuses ('succeeded' or 'failed'). However, it omits details like error handling, timeouts, or idempotency, which would aid agent understanding.

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 two sentences with no extraneous words. Purpose is front-loaded, and the polling instruction is immediately actionable. Every sentence adds value.

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 description covers the core behavior and outcome, but lacks output structure details (e.g., that the response returns a status field). Given no output schema, this omission slightly reduces completeness. Still, it is adequate for a simple status-checking tool.

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%, and the description adds no parameter-level details beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline is 3; no extra value contributed.

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 action ('Get the status') and the resource ('a running detections query'). It also distinguishes from siblings like sophos_get_detections_query_results by focusing on status polling. The polling instruction differentiates it from other get status tools.

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 instructs to 'Poll until status is 'finished'', indicating when to use this tool repeatedly. However, it does not provide explicit alternatives or conditions for when not to use it, leaving room for improvement in guiding agent decision-making.

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