poll_hunyuan_job_status

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

With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden. It explicitly lists statuses ('DONE' and 'RUN'), mentions failure states, and explains the ResultFile3Ds field with the generated ZIP path. This covers the response structure adequately, though it doesn't enumerate all failure statuses.

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 repeats the same ResultFile3Ds information in two consecutive sentences ('If status is DONE...' and 'When the status is DONE...'), making it redundant. It also has minor grammatical errors. Still, the structure is clear with a parameter section and status explanation.

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?

For a simple polling tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description provides necessary statuses, the result field, and polling guidance. It could mention the import sibling or possible error statuses, but it is sufficiently complete for an agent to use correctly.

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 only parameter, job_id, is described as 'The job_id given in the generate model step,' which directly links it to prior tool use. The schema provides no description (0% coverage), so this fills the gap completely.

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 opens with 'Check if the Hunyuan3D generation task is completed,' a specific verb+resource, and further clarifies it is a polling API. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_hunyuan3d_status by focusing on a specific job ID, not general service status.

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?

It instructs that job_id comes from the 'generate model step,' tying it to a preceding action. It also states 'This is a polling API, so only proceed if the status are finally determined,' giving clear guidance on when to stop polling. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives, but the reference to Hunyuan3D and job-specific polling is sufficient context.

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