x402_poll_job

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosureologist. It usefully states that polling is FREE, that it runs until the job finishes, and that it returns a download URL on completion. However, it does not disclose timeout/failure behavior, such as what happens when max_wait_seconds is exceeded or the job fails.

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 a single efficient sentence that front-loads the action, then packs in the prerequisite usage context, job_type mapping, and return value. Every clause earns its place and avoids unnecessary repetition of schema details.

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?

For a 4-parameter tool with no output schema, the description explains the workflow context clearly and specifies that the output is a download URL once the job completes. The schema covers timing parameters, and the description handles the crucial usage and return semantics, though it could add a note about error/timeout outcomes.

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 has 100% parameter description coverage, including enum values and defaults. The description reinforces the job_type mapping but does not add meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score 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 action ('Poll an async x402.eleeth.com job') and explicitly identifies it as the follow-up to specific job-creating tools. It distinguishes itself from the many sibling x402_* tools by describing exactly which job_type values correspond to which preceding tools.

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 explicitly says 'Use after' and maps the two job_type values ('media' and 'box') to the correct set of upstream tools. This tells an agent exactly when the tool applies, including the prerequisite workflow of first creating an async job.

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