app_get_generation

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond 'status poll' and internal usage, adding little value beyond the annotations.

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?

The description consists of two short sentences that front-load the core purpose and immediately follow with guidance on alternatives. Every word is purposeful, with no redundancy or 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?

Given the absence of an output schema and zero parameter coverage, the description fails to provide necessary invocation details. While annotations cover behavioral aspects, the lack of parameter semantics leaves the tool incomplete for agent use without external context.

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 description provides no information about the parameters 'request_id' and 'include_preview'. The agent receives no guidance on their meaning, format, or purpose, making correct invocation challenging.

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 clearly states the tool is an internal status poll for the Clipia generation viewer card, with a specific verb 'poll' and resource 'generation status'. It distinguishes from sibling get_generation by directing users to prefer the alternative.

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?

The description explicitly marks the tool as 'Internal' and advises to 'Prefer get_generation', providing clear guidance on when not to use and pointing to the alternative. However, it does not elaborate on specific scenarios for use.

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