get_job_status

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses polling behavior and the format of progress updates, which is transparent for a status-checking tool. Does not mention auth or side effects, but those are unlikely for a read-only status tool.

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 no waste. First sentence states purpose, second provides actionable usage guidance. Every word earns its place.

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, but description indirectly specifies return fields via the example report. Suggests polling frequency. Lacks explicit return type and error handling, but for a simple status tool it is sufficiently complete given typical usage.

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?

Only parameter job_id is obvious and needs little explanation. Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description adds no extra detail about job_id (e.g., format or source). However, the tool context makes the parameter self-explanatory, so it's minimally adequate.

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?

Description explicitly states tool retrieves job progress (status, percent complete, current check). Verb 'Get' and resource 'job progress' are clear, distinguishing it from siblings like get_job_results or cancel_job.

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?

Provides guidance on polling every few seconds while running and suggests a reporting template. Context is clear but no explicit exclusions or alternative tool names are given, though the polling instruction implicitly directs use during job execution.

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