Gemini job status

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

Though no annotations are present, the description adds valuable operational behavior beyond the schema, specifically advising the agent on the necessary polling frequency to monitor a running job.

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 is highly efficient. It clearly states the function in the first sentence and provides necessary operational context in the second without unnecessary fluff.

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 lack of an output schema, the description is reasonably complete by stating the possible outcomes: status, result/file path, or error. This is sufficient to guide the agent's expectations for the response.

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?

Since the schema coverage is 100%, the description provides marginal added value. It clarifies that the `job_id` must originate from specific sibling tools like `gemini_research` or `gemini_ask` to be valid.

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 defines the tool's function: to check the status and result (or error) of a Gemini bridge job. It differentiates itself as a status checker for jobs initiated by various components.

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 tool provides explicit guidance on when it is relevant ('when it has finished') and how it should be used while the process is ongoing ('Poll every minute or two while it is running').

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