Get a render status

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld and non-destructive, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context: status semantics, that output is only meaningful on succeeded, and that records/output/snapshots expire after 30 days — data lifecycle that the annotations do not express.

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?

Four short fragments, front-loaded with the core purpose and tight enough that each clause carries a distinct fact (states, output gating, expiry, no polling). The telegraphic style is efficient though slightly cryptic in the opening phrase.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by stating when output is valid and that data expires in 30 days, which is what an agent needs to interpret the response. It omits any hint about what a status payload contains, but for a single-id status read this is close to complete.

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 description coverage is 100%, with render_id's pattern/length and account's no-fallback scoping already documented in the schema. The description contributes nothing beyond that baseline, so 3 is the correct floor.

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?

Combined with the title, 'One v2 status read' plus the enumerated render states makes it clear this retrieves a render's status, distinct from mutation siblings like create_render or create_legacy_render. The phrasing is terse and 'v2' is unexplained, but the verb+resource is identifiable without opening the schema.

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?

Names the states that mean 'not finished' (planned/waiting/transcribing/rendering), tells the agent to read output only on succeeded, and explicitly rules out a polling loop. It does not name an alternative sibling (e.g. get_render_batch) or state when to prefer it, so it falls short of full when/when-not routing.

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