skypilot_get_request

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds the crucial behavioral trait that the call 'blocks until the request finishes' — a significant latency/waiting characteristic not conveyed by the annotations. No mention of timeout behavior, which would round this out.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and followed by usage and the blocking trait. Zero filler.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described. The description covers purpose, trigger, and blocking behavior. It omits timeout/failure behavior for a blocking call, but is otherwise complete for a single-parameter 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 single request_id parameter has 0% schema description coverage, so the description carries the burden. It does explain where request_id comes from (tools that return a request_id), which adds useful meaning, but doesn't specify the format or any constraints.

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+resource: waiting for a SkyPilot request and returning its result. It distinguishes itself from sibling status/log tools by making clear it is the blocking operation tied to a request_id, though it doesn't explicitly contrast itself with skypilot_api_status or skypilot_stream_and_get.

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 says to use it 'after calling tools that return a request_id' and names example producers (skypilot_cluster_launch, skypilot_cluster_stop). It gives clear triggering context but no when-not guidance, e.g., when a non-blocking status check or stream would be preferable.

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