Get Bulk Email Job

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the polling-after-start sequencing, which is genuinely useful, but says nothing about terminal states, polling cadence, or whether the job record persists/expires.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with zero filler. Nothing could be removed without losing information.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description arguably should hint at what a 'status' contains (e.g. progress/counts/failure), which it does not. For a single-parameter read tool tied to a sibling, though, it provides enough to invoke 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 0% and job_id carries no format or provenance in the schema, so the description must compensate. It does partially, by stating the job_id comes from start_bulk_email, but gives no format or example for the opaque string.

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?

Specific verb ('Read') plus resource ('bulk-email job status') and it names the originating tool, start_bulk_email. It is clearly distinct from start_bulk_email and get_email_unlock_job, though it does not explicitly contrast polling of a wave via get_campaign_email_wave.

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?

States the precondition plainly: call this after start_bulk_email returns a job_id, which tells the agent when it applies. It gives no when-not guidance or alternative for monitoring the same campaign via wave-level tools.

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