get_operation

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden. It discloses that this is a polling/check operation for async work and describes the return shape ('done' and eventually 'response' payload). It doesn't mention side effects, but as a read-only check, this is adequate context beyond the schema.

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 with zero wasted words: the first states the purpose, the second gives usage and return behavior. The most critical information (when to use and what to pass) is front-loaded. No redundancy with the schema or sibling list.

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 simple one-parameter polling tool with no output schema, the description covers the key aspects: when to use, what to pass, and what the response contains. It doesn't explain how to interpret 'done' or polling frequency, but that is reasonably inferred. Adequate and nearly complete.

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 100% and the schema already explains the 'path' parameter with an example. The description adds 'pass the path from that response', which reinforces the source but doesn't introduce meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 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 states a specific verb ('Check on') and resource ('long-running analytics query'), and distinguishes itself from siblings by referencing query_metrics and list_dimension_values. It is clear what the tool does and how it differs from the listed 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?

The description explicitly tells when to use the tool: 'when query_metrics or list_dimension_values returned done: false' and instructs to pass the 'path' from that response. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the 'when' condition is exact and actionable.

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