Check Job Status

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It implies a read-only operation by saying 'without creating a new job' and indicates it retrieves results. It could disclose more about return values or error behavior, but it does convey the main non-mutating trait.

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 sentences: the first states the function, the second gives usage context. Every word is useful, no redundancy, and it is front-loaded with the core purpose.

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?

The tool is simple with one param and clear schema. The description explains its purpose and when to use it, which is sufficient for basic operation. However, without an output schema, explicitly stating the return format (e.g., status versus image URL) would improve completeness, but the description does say 'retrieve the result', which implies returning the output.

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 input schema already provides 100% coverage for the single param job_id, describing it as returned by generate_image. The description adds no extra param details, but with complete schema coverage, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 checks the status of a previously submitted image generation job, using specific verbs and a resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like generate_image by explicitly mentioning it retrieves results without creating a new job.

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?

It gives explicit when-to-use guidance: use it if generate_image timed out or was interrupted. This provides a clear alternative context and directly tells the agent when this tool is appropriate compared to generating a new job.

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