Poll the live update feed

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, open-world, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful context beyond those hints: it feeds from the app's own live update stream, returns recently changed jobs, and supports delta updates via checkpoint. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Three short sentences, each earning its place: purpose, checkpoint usage, and routing to the preferred alternative. The core function is front-loaded and there is no filler or repetition.

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 read-only polling tool with no required parameters, the description covers the essential operational context: feed provenance, checkpoint semantics, and the higher-level alternative. It does not describe the exact response shape, but the simple 'returns jobs whose state has changed recently' plus schema-covered limit and cursor is adequate.

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?

All three parameters are fully described in the input schema with constraints and defaults, so the schema carries the semantic weight. The description reinforces the checkpoint's role, but does not substantially add meaning beyond the schema.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Poll the feed the web app itself watches while work is in flight,' and clarifies the output as 'jobs whose state has changed recently.' It also distinguishes itself from wait_for_job by noting that most callers should use that alternative instead.

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?

Explicitly tells callers to 'Pass the checkpoint from a previous response to get only what has changed since,' and directs most users to wait_for_job because it 'drives this loop for you.' This is clear when-to-use guidance with a named alternative.

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