Get Niche Dive Status

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

The description discloses the three possible return shapes (`in_progress`, `success`, `error`) and their fields, which is essential since there is no output schema. It also mentions that dives can take minutes, adding temporal behavior beyond the `readOnlyHint` annotation, which it does not contradict.

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, front-loaded with the primary use, and every sentence adds value. It efficiently explains the statuses, fields, and follow-up actions without unnecessary verbiage.

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 explains the return shapes and their fields, and also covers the polling behavior and follow-up usage of `nicheId`. It is complete for a polling tool of this complexity.

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 already provides full description for `diveId` with 100% coverage. The tool description does not add further semantic detail about the parameter itself, so the baseline of 3 applies. The reference to `create_niche_dive` matches the schema but adds no new information.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: to poll a niche dive until it finishes. The verb 'poll' plus the resource 'niche dive' are specific, and it distinguishes from sibling tools by explaining that the result is a status update with a `nicheId` to be used with other listing/niche tools.

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?

It explicitly says 'Use this to poll a niche dive started with `create_niche_dive` until it finishes', setting clear context and the relationship to the creating tool. It also advises periodic re-polling and mentions that `estimatedCompletionDate` hints when to check, providing actionable usage guidance.

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