get_ingestion_job

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

The description indicates it is a read-only status retrieval, but with no annotations, it does not cover behavioral aspects like idempotency, side effects, or required permissions. The description is minimal but sufficient to infer non-destructive nature.

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 short and front-loaded with the main purpose. The Args/Returns format is efficient, though it could be condensed into a single prose sentence without losing clarity.

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 presence of an output schema, the description does not need to detail return values. However, it lacks information about error handling, timeouts, or permissions. The description is adequate for a simple retrieval tool.

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 only parameter 'job_id' is described merely as 'Job identifier' with no additional context on format, constraints, or examples. Since schema description coverage is 0%, the description adds little value beyond the schema.

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 retrieves 'detailed status of a data ingestion job', specifying a concrete verb and resource. It distinguishes the tool from siblings like list_ingestion_jobs and cancel_ingestion_job.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_ingestion_jobs. No prerequisites, context, or when-not-to-use information is provided.

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