get_prediction

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full burden. It states the tool returns 'current state and result URL when complete,' which is adequate but lacks details on possible states, error handling, or idempotency. More transparency on the async behavior would help.

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?

Two concise sentences efficiently convey purpose, scope, and output. Front-loaded with the verb 'Check' and no unnecessary 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 low complexity (one param, no output schema), the description covers the essential purpose, output, and input origin. Minor gaps: does not enumerate possible states or mention error cases for invalid IDs, but still fully usable.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% and the description's parameter info ('returned by generate_photo, edit_image, or create_video') duplicates the schema. No additional meaning is added beyond the schema, meeting baseline expectations.

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 checks the status of an async operation for generation, edit, or video. It explicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like generate_photo, edit_image, and create_video (which start operations) and list_predictions (which lists all predictions).

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 the tool is used after initiating an async operation to check its status, and differentiates from siblings. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when not to use it (e.g., for initiating operations or listing all predictions) or alternatives.

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