retrieve_remesh_task

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does not explain whether the call is read-only, how task states or results are reported, what happens if task_id is invalid, or whether polling is expected.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for the task, though the terseness contributes to the missing behavioral and parameter 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?

With no annotations, no output schema, an undocumented parameter, and many sibling task tools, the description is too thin. It should clarify polling behavior, expected task states, and when the result becomes available.

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 single parameter task_id has 0% schema description coverage, and the description adds no detail about its format, source, or constraints. It only implies the ID belongs to a remesh task, which is already obvious from the tool name.

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 specific verb and resource: retrieve the status and result of a remesh task. It clearly distinguishes itself from create/list/stream/delete by naming the retrieval action, but it does not explicitly contrast with siblings like list_remesh_tasks or retrieve_*_task for other task types.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_remesh_tasks or stream_remesh_task. The implied usage (polling a previously created remesh task) is inferable from the description but not stated.

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