Retrieve a template build's status, progress, and result image by its build ID. Use the returned image reference to create a sandbox once the build is ready.
Retrieve one template build by its build ID (state, progress, and result image). A READY build's imageDigestRef is the reference tenki_create_sandbox's image arg takes.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| build_id | Yes | The template build ID. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.3.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, so the description adds value by explaining the result includes state, progress, and result image, plus how imageDigestRef is consumed by tenki_create_sandbox. This goes beyond what annotations and schema provide.
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?
Two concise, front-loaded sentences with no filler. The main action and return contents come first, and the downstream integration detail earns its place in the second sentence.
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 one-parameter, read-only, idempotent lookup tool, the description is complete: it names the key result fields and connects the result to a concrete downstream use in tenki_create_sandbox. No output schema exists, but the description covers the essential return semantics.
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 description coverage is 100% and the only parameter, build_id, is documented as 'The template build ID.' The description reinforces 'by its build ID' but adds no extra format or semantic detail beyond what the schema already provides.
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?
Description uses a specific verb 'Retrieve' with a precise resource, 'one template build by its build ID', and names the returned aspects: state, progress, and result image. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like tenki_get_template and tenki_list_active_template_builds.
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?
Gives strong usage context: use this to retrieve a build and, when READY, its imageDigestRef is what tenki_create_sandbox's image argument expects. It does not explicitly name alternatives or say when not to use it, but the downstream purpose is clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.