Get Replicate Prediction Status

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint. The description adds detailed behavioral context: it explains return shape (PredictionResult same as replicate_generate_image), possible statuses ('processing', 'starting', succeeded), and the behavior of the download parameter. The typical flow further illustrates the polling pattern.

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 well-structured: purpose sentence, bullet-pointed args, returns section, and numbered typical flow. It is concise with no extraneous information, front-loading key usage 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?

Given no output schema, the description explains the return shape and possible statuses. The typical flow completes the picture. Missing details like error handling or exact local download paths, but overall complete for a polling tool.

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%, so parameters are documented. The description adds value by explaining that prediction_id comes from a previous call and that download only works if the prediction has succeeded. This provides meaningful context beyond the schema descriptions.

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 'Retrieve the current status and (if available) outputs of a Replicate prediction by its ID.' It uses a specific verb (retrieve) and resource (prediction by ID), and the typical flow distinguishes it from sibling tools like replicate_batch_status or replicate_get_training.

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 explicitly says 'Use this when a previous generate_* or run_model call returned pending=true (timed out before completion).' This provides clear context for when to use the tool. It lacks explicit exclusions of alternatives but the guidance is strong.

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