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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds value beyond them: 'Free' discloses cost, and 'Poll until done is true' discloses the async polling contract. It does not mention backoff, rate limits, or failure semantics, so not a 5.

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?

Three short sentences, zero filler, cost and polling constraint front-loaded. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described. The description covers purpose, cost, polling, and job origin. Only failure/terminal-status behavior is absent, a minor gap for a status endpoint.

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 0% for the single jobId parameter, so the description must compensate. It does indicate the jobId originates from blackwood_image_generate, which is useful provenance, but gives no format, length, or validity guidance, so it only partially compensates.

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+resource ('Status and result of a job') and ties it to the exact sibling that creates the job ('blackwood_image_generate'). An agent can distinguish it from the sibling generate tool without opening either schema.

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 until done is true' gives explicit operational guidance on how to use it, and the reference to the originating job implies it is only used after blackwood_image_generate. It does not state what to do on failure or a terminal error state, so it stops short of full when/when-not coverage.

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