get_gamma_generation

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well by disclosing the polling interval (every 5 seconds), the default behavior, and the return of final URLs and optional export URLs. It does not mention timeout handling or error scenarios, but the core behavior is transparent.

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, front-loaded, and every sentence earns its place. It conveys purpose, default behavior, alternatives, and return contents in just two sentences without redundancy.

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?

For a polling tool with no output schema, the description adequately explains what is returned and how polling works. It does not detail status values or error handling, and the phrase 'if requested' is slightly ambiguous, but overall it is complete enough for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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 already provides complete and clear descriptions for all three parameters, covering generationId, maxWaitSeconds, and pollUntilComplete. The description adds no additional parameter-specific semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 3 applies.

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 status and URLs of a Gamma generation, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes this from the sibling tool generate_gamma by focusing on retrieval and status checking.

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 recommends automatic polling by default and notes the alternative of single status checks, giving clear guidance on when to use each mode. It does not explicitly mention the sibling tool, but the context of retrieving versus generating is implied strongly.

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