Get Niche Dive Status

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=true), but the description goes well beyond them: it enumerates the three response shapes (in_progress/success/error), names the fields each carries, and discloses polling cadence and the multi-minute latency plus the estimatedCompletionDate hint. That is rich behavioral context an agent needs and cannot get from structured fields.

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-loaded with the 'use this to poll...' purpose, then return shapes, then next steps. Dense and useful, though the parenthetical about a re-dive returning the same niche is slightly longer than needed.

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?

With no output schema, the description fully compensates by describing all three return shapes and their fields, plus polling guidance. An agent has everything required to call and consume this tool correctly.

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 single diveId parameter is already fully documented in the schema, including its origin tools. The description repeats much of that ('the dive identifier returned by ...') but adds nothing on format or valid values, so the 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+resource ('poll a niche dive ... until it finishes') and names the originating tools (create_niche_dive, create_niche_dive_from_competitors_list, redive_niche, add_niche_keywords), so an agent can distinguish it from any sibling without opening the 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?

Explicitly says when to call it (after a dive is started), how to call it (re-poll periodically), and what to do with the result (feed nicheId to list_niches, get_niche_keywords, get_niche_competitors). Nothing is left to inference.

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