Get Import Job

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates a read-only operation through 'Retrieves', but does not disclose what the response contains, whether the job can be polled, or any error behavior. The disclosure is minimal but not misleading.

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, focused sentence that states the action and resource without any redundancy. It is front-loaded and contains no unnecessary details.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description is mostly adequate, but it lacks information about the expected return status values and how the jobId is obtained. It also does not reference related tools like get_export_job, leaving some contextual ambiguity.

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 describes jobId with type and minLength but no description, and schema description coverage is 0%. The description does not elaborate on the jobId parameter, such as where it comes from or its format, relying entirely on the parameter name for 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 clearly states the verb 'Retrieves' and the resource 'current status of a Canva import job', which precisely identifies the tool's function. It also distinguishes the tool from get_export_job by specifying 'import job' rather than 'export 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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_export_job, nor does it mention any prerequisites for obtaining a jobId. Usage context is entirely implied by the tool name and description.

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