Get background job status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description reinforces this with 'Read-only.' It adds genuinely useful behavior beyond the annotation: the idle/running semantics, the polling requirement, and the reason (settled layout vs mid-move state). No contradicting claims.

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 short, purposeful sentences. The status meaning is front-loaded, followed by a concrete usage warning; no filler or repeated schema data.

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 zero-parameter, read-only status poll with no output schema, the description covers what the tool reports, how to use it, and why the timing matters. An agent has enough to call it correctly without further documentation.

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 tool has zero parameters and 100% schema coverage by default, so the description does not need to explain parameters. The baseline 4 applies because there is nothing to document.

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?

States a specific verb ('get') and resource ('plate's background job worker'), and clarifies it reports whether the worker is 'idle or still running'. This distinguishes it from related status/slice tools by focusing on background job state and its async relationship to arrange_plate and auto_orient.

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?

Explicitly instructs to poll until idle before reading object positions or slicing, explaining that arrange_plate and auto_orient launch async jobs. It tells the agent when to use the tool and what to avoid (acting on a mid-move state), making workflow selection unambiguous.

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