Get a finished job (video URL and details)

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint/openWorldHint annotations, the description discloses real operational behavior: signed URLs expire after 7 days and must be re-fetched, and the response includes input parameters and credits charged. It stops short of saying what happens when the job is not yet finished.

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 dense but well-structured sentence: identity first, then the model-to-field mapping, then URL expiry behavior, then extra returned data. Every clause earns its place with 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, the description carries the return-value burden and does so reasonably by naming the model-specific URL fields and the parameters/credits returned. It omits other record fields and the failure mode for an unfinished job, so it is solid but not fully complete.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by mapping each model enum value to where its output lands (video, video_url, file), which is meaningful semantics the schema lacks. The id parameter is left to the schema's uuid format with no added meaning.

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 clear verb+resource ('Full record of a job') and the title adds the key disambiguator 'finished job'. However, the body text alone does not distinguish it from close siblings like get_job_status or wait_for_job, leaving that routing to the title.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance or mention of alternatives such as get_job_status or wait_for_job. The only implied condition is that the job must be finished, carried by the title rather than the description text.

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