get-metering-job-status

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden, but it only says 'Get job status'. It does not mention what is returned (e.g., status string, metadata), whether the job must exist, permission requirements, or potential errors. The read-only nature is implied by 'Get' but not explicitly disclosed.

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 a single concise sentence with no filler words. It front-loads the action and subject, making it easy to parse quickly while still conveying the tool's core purpose.

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?

Although the tool is simple with one parameter and no output schema, the description is too sparse to be complete. It omits what job_id refers to and what 'status' entails (e.g., possible values). Additional context about the expected input and result would be necessary for an agent to use it confidently.

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?

The schema has one parameter (job_id) with 0% description coverage, and the tool description does not mention it at all. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema's minimal definition, failing to compensate for the complete lack of parameter documentation.

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 ('Get'), resource ('job status'), and scope ('metering job') with the qualifier 'only', which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get-metering-job and get-metering-job-result. It unambiguously identifies what the tool does.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get-metering-job or get-metering-job-result. The phrase 'only for a metering job' scopes the input but does not explain use cases, prerequisites, or when to prefer a different tool.

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