Codex job status

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden; it does disclose three distinct modes (block waiting, plain fetch, cancel), which is real behavioral content. It omits whether cancel is destructive or irreversible, whether waiting blocks the agent, and any permission or rate-limit constraints.

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?

A single sentence covering all three operating modes with no filler; the fetch/result framing is front-loaded. Slightly compressed in a way that blurs the distinction between the three modes.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description should say what a result actually looks like and what happens when the job is not yet complete. It only hints at this indirectly via the schema's wait_seconds ('returning a job_id'), and is silent on cancel permanence.

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 67%: cancel and wait_seconds are documented in the schema with meaning and range. The description adds value by clarifying that job_id originates from a codex_task or codex_image job, but it adds nothing about cancel semantics or wait behavior beyond what the schema says.

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 set (wait for / fetch / cancel) and the resource (a codex_task or codex_image job), so an agent understands it acts on job results rather than creating them. It does not distinguish itself from the sibling codex_jobs, leaving ambiguity about which of the two to call.

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?

By naming codex_task / codex_image as the job producers, it implies this is the follow-up call that retrieves or cancels their output. However, there is no explicit when-to-use vs codex_jobs, no statement of preconditions, and no guidance on choosing wait vs fetch vs cancel.

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