Get a batch of grids

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavior beyond that: the per-grid outcome states (waiting/running/completed/failed with reason) and that the call is free, which is a cost hint an agent cannot get from 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?

A single sentence with the resource and lifecycle anchor front-loaded, followed by the status enumeration. Every clause carries information and there is no filler.

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?

With no output schema and no annotation detail, the description must convey the return shape, and it does: per-grid status plus average rank and top 3 for completed grids, and failure reasons. Only the batch_id parameter origin is left thin.

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% and batch_id is not described in the schema at all, so the description carries the burden. It only indirectly signals that batch_id is the handle returned by run_grids; it never states the parameter name, format, or its source explicitly.

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?

States precisely what the tool returns — the progress/status of a batch — and anchors it to the run_grids lifecycle, which separates it from get_grid (single grid) and list_grids. It reads as a noun phrase rather than an explicit verb+resource, but the resource and scope are unambiguous.

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 phrase 'a batch started with run_grids' implies the prerequisite and where the batch_id originates, so usage is inferable. However, no alternative is named (e.g. get_grid for a single grid) and there is no explicit when-not guidance.

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