Get a Replicate training by ID

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

Annotations already provide idempotent, read-only, and non-destructive hints. The description adds that the tool returns status, model version, and error, giving further insight into the response structure. No contradictions.

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 concise, with a clear purpose statement, an Args section, and a Returns note. Every sentence adds value, and the structure is easy to parse.

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 the tool has only one parameter and no output schema, the description fully explains what the tool does and what it returns (TrainingSummary with status, version, error). No gaps remain.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with a description for training_id. The description adds that the ID comes from replicate_create_training, providing context beyond the schema's description of 'ID of the training run to inspect'.

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 retrieves the current state of a training run, listing specific data: status, trained model version, and errors. It distinguishes from siblings like replicate_create_training and replicate_list_trainings by focusing on a single training's detailed state.

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?

Specifies that training_id must come from replicate_create_training, implying this tool is used after creation to check progress. While it does not explicitly exclude alternatives like replicate_list_trainings or replicate_cancel_training, the context makes its use case clear.

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