get_distill_status

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns status, progress, and result (if completed), and indicates the terminal states. This provides useful context about the async nature and what to expect, though it doesn't mention any potential errors or rate limits.

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, front-loaded, and every sentence earns its place. It states the purpose, return contents, and polling guidance in just two short sentences without redundancy.

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 with one parameter, no annotations, and no output schema. The description covers the essential behavioral aspects: what it returns and when to poll. It's complete enough for a status-check tool, though it could optionally mention the exact status values or error behavior, but these are not critical.

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 has 100% coverage for the single parameter, and the parameter description in the schema adds meaning: 'Task ID from distill_url or distill_file.' This clarifies the expected input. The main description complements this by explaining the purpose of the status check.

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 tool's function: 'Check the status of an async distillation task.' This is a specific verb+resource combination that distinguishes it from siblings like distill_url (start a task) or list_distillations (list tasks).

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 provides clear usage context: 'Poll this periodically until status is completed or failed.' This implies when to use the tool (after starting an async task) and how to use it (repeatedly). It doesn't explicitly address alternatives, but the sibling tools are distinct enough that no exclusion is needed.

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