poll_hunyuan_job_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool returns status ('DONE', 'RUN'), that 'DONE' includes 'ResultFile3Ds' with the ZIP path, and that it should be polled. It could mention error states more precisely but is generally transparent.

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?

The description is well-structured with a clear opening sentence, parameter list, and return details. It is slightly verbose but front-loads the purpose and avoids redundancy.

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?

Given the tool has one parameter and no output schema, the description is complete: it explains the return format (status, ResultFile3Ds), the polling requirement, and references the generation step. No gaps remain.

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?

The schema has one parameter 'job_id' with 0% description coverage. The description adds value by stating 'the job_id given in the generate model step,' providing context about its origin beyond the schema's basic type and title.

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?

The description states 'Check if the Hunyuan3D generation task is completed,' clearly specifying the verb ('check') and resource ('Hunyuan3D generation task'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_hunyuan3d_status' and 'poll_rodin_job_status' by focusing on polling behavior.

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?

The description explicitly says 'This is a polling API, so only proceed if the status are finally determined,' providing clear guidance on when to use (poll until done) and implying when not to use. It does not directly mention alternatives but the polling context is sufficient.

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