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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the word 'poll', giving no insight into batch lifecycle states, how to tell a batch is finished, rate limits, or why polling is safe/necessary.

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?

A single six-word phrase with zero filler, so nothing is wasted. However, it is arguably under-specified rather than truly concise; a brief clause on what polling yields would earn its place without bloat.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description carries the burden of explaining return semantics, yet it says nothing about status values or what a completed batch returns. For a polling endpoint this leaves a meaningful gap an agent must guess at.

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?

Only one parameter exists and schema description coverage is 100%, with the schema itself explaining that id is 'the batch_id returned by the submit call.' The description adds nothing beyond that, so the baseline of 3 for fully documented schema is appropriate.

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 ('poll') and resource ('bulk find-email batch'), making clear this retrieves status/results rather than initiating work. The verb implicitly distinguishes it from the submit sibling (contacts-enrich_work_email_batch), but no sibling is named explicitly and the object returned is not characterized.

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?

'Poll' implies repeated invocation until a batch completes, but the description gives no when-to-use guidance, no completion condition, and no pointer to the submit tool that generates the required id. There are no exclusions or alternatives offered.

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