get_report_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry behavioral disclosure; it only states the operation, omitting return shape, failure behavior for unknown reports, whether status is pollable, or authentication/permissions. Since it's a read/get operation, there is some safe inference from the name, but no concrete details.

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 no filler; every word contributes to the core purpose. Appropriate size for a simple one-parameter 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?

Given the simple one-parameter schema and no output schema, the description covers the basic operation but lacks any return value details or usage caveats. It is minimally viable but not rich; no annotations or output schema place more burden on the description, so it falls short of complete.

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% with a single report_id parameter described as 'The unique identifier of the report'. The description adds only the context that the report is 'generated', which doesn't materially enrich parameter semantics 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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and identifies the resource ('status and details of a generated report'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling list_reports and generate_report tools. However, it doesn't further distinguish from similar single-report retrieval tools or qualify scope.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives; it doesn't mention that it should be used only after generate_report, nor exclude alternative retrieval paths. The intended usage is only implied by the tool name.

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