Get Jules Session Status

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It adds useful behavioral context by indicating the tool is for repeated polling and the typical duration, implying it's safe to call. However, it does not explicitly state that it is read-only, disclose error behavior, or mention any side effects or permissions needed.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and includes only essential usage guidance (polling and typical duration). No filler or redundancy.

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 tool's simplicity (2 params, no output schema, no annotations), the description adequately covers purpose, usage, and typical duration. It lacks mention of return structure or error cases, but the description sets expectations for polling and completion, making it complete enough for most AI agents.

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 100% for both parameters (sessionId and includeActivities), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema already provides, except arguably the 'recent activity' phrase aligns with includeActivities, but that's redundant.

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 tool checks 'current status and recent activity of a Jules session,' which is a specific verb and resource. It differentiates from siblings like jules_get_session_output (which presumably retrieves final output) and jules_list_activities by focusing on session status and polling, while explicitly noting the duration range.

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 gives explicit usage context: 'Use this to poll for progress and completion,' and provides expected time bounds ('Sessions typically take 5-60 minutes'). It does not name alternative tools or state when not to use it, but the context is clear for a polling tool.

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