get_queue_item

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The verb 'Poll' implies a read/status-check operation, and the mention of wait=False adds useful async context, but the description does not state what the response contains, whether it blocks, or whether it can be safely called repeatedly. Some behavior is inferable, but not explicit.

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 a single sentence with no filler. It front-loads the action and resource, then adds the key provenance detail in a compact em-dash clause. Every part earns its place.

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?

For a simple one-parameter tool, the description gives good provenance for the input but omits what the agent can expect as output or how to interpret the poll result. Since there is no output schema or annotations to fill that gap, the description is somewhat incomplete for fully confident invocation.

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 input schema only says queue_url is a required string with 0% schema description coverage. The description compensates by explaining that this URL is the queue item URL returned by trigger_build/deploy when wait=False, giving the parameter operational meaning 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 uses a specific verb ('Poll') and a specific resource ('a single queue item URL'), and clearly distinguishes it from the broader get_queue tool. It also states the exact source of the URL, which removes ambiguity about what the tool acts on.

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 states the scenario in which this tool should be used: when trigger_build or deploy is called with wait=False and returns a queue URL. It does not name alternative tools or exclusions, but the context is clear enough for an agent to select it correctly.

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