Get Upload Job

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is already covered. The description adds a meaningful behavioral detail: omitting jobId returns recent jobs rather than failing. It does not disclose pagination, rate limits, or what the status payload contains, so beyond the default-behavior note it is fairly thin.

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 sentences, zero waste. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the default behavior when jobId is omitted follows immediately. Nothing is repeated from the title.

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 read tool this covers the call decision well. However, with no output schema, the description never specifies what a job's status response contains (state, progress, errors), leaving the agent uninformed about the return shape.

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 0%, and the single jobId parameter is undocumented in the schema. The description compensates by explaining jobId selects a specific upload while its absence defaults to a list of recent jobs, which is exactly the semantic an agent needs to choose between the two call forms.

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 states the resource (upload job) and exactly what it reports: how an upload started by create_gallery, create_video, create_series, or add_episodes is progressing. It also distinguishes itself from those creation siblings by positioning itself as the status-query counterpart, so an agent can tell which tool actually starts an upload and which reports on it.

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?

Usage context is clear: call this to check on an upload initiated by one of the four named creation tools, or omit jobId to list recent jobs. It does not state explicit exclusions or name alternative status tools, but the triggering condition is unambiguous enough for selection.

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