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

Goes well beyond readOnlyHint/openWorldHint by enumerating the four status values, explaining that success yields a 60-minute keyless `download_url` to hand to the user, that failure yields `error` and `code`, that results expire after 7 days, and that an API key is required. It also discloses the tool is free and unmetered, which an agent needs before deciding to poll.

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?

Front-loads the action and the sibling link, then groups return-shape facts and operational facts in short sentences. The credits line is one sentence and earns its place by answering a decision the agent would otherwise have to guess at.

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?

Even though an output schema exists, the description supplies the lifecycle and auth details the schema cannot: retention window, link expiry, and credential requirement. Nothing needed to call or interpret this polling tool is missing.

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% and the `job_id` property already says it is the id returned by `ocr_pdf`. The description restates that origin but adds no format, validation, or lookup semantics beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Check an OCR job') and ties it to the sibling that created the job ('you queued with `ocr_pdf`'), so it is unmistakable against `ocr_pdf` itself.

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?

Clear context: use this after queueing with `ocr_pdf`, which is the only realistic alternative. No explicit when-not guidance, but with one sibling and one required param there is little ambiguity to resolve.

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