poll_rodin_job_status

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains that this is a polling API, describes the expected status values for each mode, and clarifies the condition to stop polling (all 'Done' or 'COMPLETED', or failure states).

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 with a brief summary followed by separate sections for each mode. Every sentence adds value, and the key information is front-loaded. No unnecessary 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 the simple input schema (2 parameters, no required fields, no enums, no output schema), the description provides complete context: explains both modes, their parameters, the return statuses, and the polling logic. It adequately covers the tool's behavior for selection and invocation.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does so by explaining that 'subscription_key' is for MAIN_SITE mode and 'request_id' is for FAL_AI mode, linking each parameter to its usage context and the generate model step. It does not clarify handling if both parameters are provided.

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 states 'Check if the Hyper3D Rodin generation task is completed' with specific verbs and resources, clearly distinguishing from sibling tools like 'poll_hunyuan_job_status' and other generation tools.

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 explains when to use the tool (polling for Rodin task completion) and provides explicit context for two modes (MAIN_SITE vs FAL_AI). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternatives beyond the sibling context.

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