Get the status of a batch screenshot job. Poll this until status is 'completed' or 'failed' (wait 2-5 seconds between polls). Completed items include presigned download URLs valid for 24 hours.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| job_id | Yes | The batch job ID returned by batch_screenshots |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and description adds extra context about polling behavior and presigned URL validity (24 hours), enhancing transparency without contradiction.
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?
Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no wasted words. Every sentence provides essential information (what, how, and what to expect).
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?
Despite lacking output schema, description explains response contents (status strings, presigned URLs for completed items) and polling behavior, which is sufficient for this simple tool with good annotations.
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 baseline is 3. Description does not add new parameter info beyond what the schema already states (job_id as batch job ID from batch_screenshots).
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?
Description uses specific verb 'Get' and resource 'status of a batch screenshot job', clearly distinguishing from sibling tools like batch_screenshots (creates job) and check_screenshot_cache (checks cache).
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?
Explicit polling guidance: 'Poll this until status is completed or failed (wait 2-5 seconds between polls)'. Does not explicitly state when not to use, but the guidance is clear and actionable.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.