text_to_image_get

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It only says 'Check the status', omitting behavioral details like whether responses include progress, possible states, or if polling is needed. No side effects or auth requirements mentioned.

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?

One sentence, no waste. Efficient but could be slightly expanded with useful details (e.g., expected format of ID) without breaking conciseness.

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?

No output schema, so description should explain return values or behavior. It does not. For a simple status-checking tool, crucial info (response fields, states) is missing, making it incomplete.

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% ('Task ID'). The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies as schema already documents the parameter, but no additional context is provided.

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 the status of a text-to-image task. It uses a specific verb ('check') and resource ('status of a text-to-image task'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like create, delete, and list.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Context implies it follows text_to_image_create, but no explicit prerequisites, exclusions, or mentions of sibling tools like wait_for_task.

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