forge3d-mcp

Get Job

get_job

Retrieve a generation job by ID to inspect its status, output path, log, and error details.

Instructions

Read one generation job by id (status, output path, log, error).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "job_id": "<job_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_job"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`job_id`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.6.7Nov 4, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden; 'Read' does signal a non-mutating operation and the parenthetical hints at the payload shape. However, it says nothing about behavior when the id is unknown (error vs empty), whether logs are truncated, or any auth requirement, which are the traits an agent most needs beyond the schema.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

One short sentence with the scope and return contents front-loaded and no filler. Every clause earns its place, and nothing needed for selection is buried later in the string.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a single-parameter read tool with an output schema available, the definition covers purpose, key, and the main fields returned, which is sufficient to invoke it correctly. The only shortfall is undocumented behavior on a missing or still-running job, which matters for interpreting the response.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0% for the single parameter, so the description must compensate, and 'by id' does establish that job_id is the job identifier as opposed to a model or run id. It adds no format, provenance, or example of where such an id comes from, leaving the gap only half closed.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description gives a specific verb and resource ('Read one generation job'), names the lookup key ('by id'), and enumerates what the result contains (status, output path, log, error). This clearly separates it from list_jobs, though it never names that sibling explicitly.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer it should call this when it already has a job id and wants details rather than a listing. There is no explicit when-to-use statement, no exclusion, and no pointer to list_jobs for discovering ids in the first place.

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