Skip to main content
Glama

Get Rendobar Job

get_job
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve the status and results of a submitted job, including progress, cost, and output files. Optionally wait up to 50 seconds for completion using long-polling.

Instructions

Check status and get results of a submitted job. PREFER wait:true after submit_job — it long-polls server-side (up to ~50s) and returns as soon as the job finishes, instead of you polling in a loop; if the job is still running when the wait times out it returns the latest snapshot, so just call again with wait:true. Returns progress, current step, cost, and output when done. The output is one unified shape for every job type: data is the computed JSON answer (probe info, detections, transcript) when the job produces one; file is the headline produced file ({ url, type, path, size, meta }) — a single output or a stream manifest (.m3u8/.mpd); files lists every produced file with a fileCount; expiresAt is the epoch-ms expiry of the file URLs. Data-only jobs have file null and no files; file-only jobs have no data. Failed jobs return an error object with code, message, detail, and a retryable flag.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
waitNoWhen true, wait for the job to reach a terminal status (long-poll, up to ~50 seconds) instead of returning the current status immediately. Times out gracefully with the latest snapshot — call again with wait:true to keep waiting.
jobIdYesJob ID returned by submit_job (e.g. 'job_abc123')

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes
costNoFormatted cost, present when complete
stepNoName of the currently running step
typeYes
errorNoPresent when failed
outputNoPresent when complete
statusYesOpen set: waiting | dispatched | running | complete | failed | cancelled
progressNoFraction of completed steps (0–1); present while running
durationMsNo
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations indicate readOnly, openWorld, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds behavioral details beyond annotations: the long-poll behavior, timeout (~50s), graceful timeout returning latest snapshot, return shape details (progress, step, cost, output), and error structure with retryable flag.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is well-structured and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence adds value, but it is lengthy. Could be slightly more concise without losing clarity.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's complexity (wait parameter, multiple job types, different output shapes for data-only, file-only, and failed jobs), the description covers all scenarios. Output schema exists but description explains output structure clearly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% with descriptions for both parameters (wait and jobId). The description adds context: explains wait:true long-polling and retry strategy, and clarifies jobId is from submit_job. This goes beyond schema but baseline is 3 due to full schema coverage.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description explicitly states the tool 'check[s] status and get[s] results of a submitted job,' which is a specific verb+resource pair. It differentiates from sibling tools like submit_job and cancel_job by focusing on checking results, and from list_jobs by targeting a single job.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides explicit guidance: 'PREFER wait:true after submit_job — it long-polls server-side...' and explains when to call again ('if the job is still running... call again with wait:true'). It also covers when not to wait and how to handle different job types.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/rendobar/mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server