poll_hunyuan_job_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions status transitions but lacks details on polling behavior (e.g., rate limiting, timeout, error handling). The description only covers basic status values, leaving significant behavioral gaps.

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 extremely concise (two sentences, 18 words) and front-loads the purpose. Every word contributes to the core meaning, but it could expand slightly without losing conciseness (e.g., error states). Still, it is well-structured for its simplicity.

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 annotations, output schema, and parameter descriptions, the tool description is incomplete. It does not explain the return format, possible error statuses, or how to interpret the response. For a polling tool, critical context like expected delay or termination conditions is missing.

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 description coverage is 0% (the job_id parameter has no description in the schema). The tool description does not add any meaning beyond the schema's parameter name 'job_id'. It fails to explain what a valid job_id looks like or where to obtain it, adding minimal value.

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?

Description clearly states the tool polls Hunyuan3D generation status and defines the statuses ('DONE', 'RUN'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_hunyuan3d_status (which might be a single check) and poll_rodin_job_status (different model). The verb 'poll' and resource 'Hunyuan3D generation status' are specific.

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 implies usage after starting a job but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs. alternatives like get_hunyuan3d_status. No instructions on polling frequency or conditions for stopping. Basic guidance is present but insufficient for optimal agent decision-making.

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