Skip to main content
Glama

check_job

Read-onlyIdempotent

Check the status/result of a job previously returned by generate_image, generate_video, generate_video_from_image, or generate_video_with_reference.

Besides status/result it reports PROGRESS, so you can tell the person something
truthful instead of "still waiting":
  queue_position — how many jobs are ahead (1 = next to be picked up); only while queued
  queue_seconds  — how long it sat in the queue
  run_seconds    — how long the generation itself has been running
  account_used   — which Google account it ran on, once finished
  hint           — the same thing in one human sentence
A job that is queued behind others needs patience; one that has been running far longer
than its model's typical time (see list_models) is the one worth reporting as stuck.

Once status is 'done', SAVE THE FILES: the response carries `download_urls` (no auth
header needed) and `save_as` (filenames). Write them into the user's project — e.g.
./media/<save_as> — and tell them where. The URLs expire within the hour, and the
server's own copy can be reclaimed when its disk fills; the copy in their project is
the one that lasts.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
job_idYes
include_previewNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, and the description adds substantial behavioral context beyond them: progress fields, queue semantics, URL expiry, and server-copy reclamation. This fully discloses what happens to results over time, which is valuable for a polling tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Although longer than average, every section earns its place: what fields are reported, how to interpret them, and what to do on completion. The critical 'done' action is explicit and front-loaded, and there is no filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a tool with no output schema, the description covers the response shape well, including progress fields, download_urls, save_as, and URL expiration. The main gaps are the undocumented include_preview parameter and explicit status enum values, but overall it is nearly complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It gives real semantic meaning to job_id ('previously returned by...'), but it never mentions include_preview, the optional boolean parameter. This is partial compensation rather than complete parameter coverage.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb ('Check') and a clear resource ('status/result of a job'), and it explicitly scopes the job to those previously returned by four named generator tools. This makes it easy to distinguish from sibling generator tools and other status-type tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description clearly states when to use it: only for jobs previously returned by the listed generators. It also gives concrete post-completion actions (save download_urls into the project). It does not explicitly name an alternative tool or state when not to use it, but the context is sufficient for a poll-type tool.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.