get_batch

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true (safe read) and openWorldHint=true (unexpected response fields). The description adds 'status' but does not elaborate on what the status includes or any side effects. With annotations covering safety, the description provides minimal additional behavioral context, just a restatement of the tool's reading nature.

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 extremely concise: two short sentences. The first sentence states purpose upfront, and the second explains the single parameter. No wasted words.

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 simple get-status tool with one required parameter and an output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and parameter. However, it does not explicitly state that the parameter is required (though the schema does), nor does it mention error handling or batch status semantics. Still, it is nearly complete given the tool's simplicity.

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%, but the description compensates fully by specifying that 'name' is a batch job name (e.g., 'batches/abc') from create_batch. This adds meaning, format, and origin beyond the schema's bare type definition.

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 'Get the status of a batch job,' which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like cancel_batch, create_batch, delete_batch, list_batches, and get_batch_results by focusing on status retrieval.

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 implies usage context by noting the name comes from create_batch, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_batches (to enumerate all batches) or get_batch_results (to get actual outputs). No exclusion or when-not guidance is provided.

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