ywm_get_feed_upload_status

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'get', implying a read-only operation, but does not confirm side-effect-free behavior, prerequisites (e.g., host_id), or what happens if the upload doesn't exist. Lacks transparency.

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?

Extremely concise (one phrase), no wasted words. Front-loaded with the purpose. However, slightly too sparse for a tool with no other documentation.

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 many sibling tools and no output schema, the description should clarify that 'feed upload status' refers to a specific upload (likely after start_feed_upload) and mention what the returned status looks like. It is incomplete for safe invocation.

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 input schema covers 100% of the single parameter (host_id) with a description. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema provides, meeting the baseline for high coverage.

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 'Get feed upload status' clearly identifies the action (get) and the resource (feed upload status). It distinguishes from siblings like ywm_list_feeds (list feeds) and ywm_start_feed_upload (start upload), but does not elaborate on what 'status' entails, leaving some ambiguity.

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 versus alternatives. Given the many feed-related siblings, explicit context about typical use cases (e.g., checking status after starting an upload) would help the agent decide.

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