get-recrawl-task

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context the annotations do not: the dependency chain (task_id originates from add-recrawl-url) and the fact that this call does not consume quota. It stops short of describing the possible state values, which would be the remaining gap.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core action before the routing rules. The third exclusion sentence is slightly tangential to the primary purpose but still earns its place as disambiguation against the quota-spending tool.

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?

For a two-parameter read with full annotations and no output schema, the description covers origin, scope and exclusions adequately. The only missing piece is what the returned state values look like, which is a minor omission given the annotations already establish this as a safe read.

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 host_id and task_id are already documented, giving a baseline of 3. The description adds meaningful semantics on top by telling the agent where task_id comes from, which is the critical piece for constructing a valid call.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get state of a single recrawl task by task_id') and immediately scopes it against siblings by naming get-recrawl-queue and add-recrawl-url. An agent can distinguish it from every other get-* tool without opening a 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?

Gives an explicit when-to-use condition ('when the user has a task id from add-recrawl-url') plus two explicit when-not-to-use cases with the correct alternative named for each. Nothing is left to inference about routing.

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