get_ingest_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 only states that the tool polls status/result, but does not disclose whether it is idempotent, blocking, error behavior, or any other behavioral traits beyond a basic poll operation.

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 short sentence that efficiently conveys the core purpose and includes a cross-reference to a related tool. No wasted words.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description should provide more context about return values, error handling, and polling behavior. It only mentions status/result without detailing what is returned or how to interpret it, leaving significant gaps for effective use.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage for the job_id parameter, and the description does not add any meaning or guidance about the parameter (e.g., format, source, uniqueness). This leaves the agent with no semantic help for using the parameter correctly.

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 tool's purpose: to poll the status/result of an AI ingest job. It uses a specific verb (poll) and resource (status/result of AI ingest job), and references the sibling tool ingest_purchase_pdf to provide context and distinguish it from the ingestion initiation tool.

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 implies usage context by referencing ingest_purchase_pdf, suggesting this tool is used after initiating an ingest job. However, it does not explicitly state when to use it vs alternatives or provide exclusions.

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