Get task status / result

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

Description adds behavioral details beyond annotations: status enum values, result fields for completed/failed states, and polling recommendation. Annotations indicate read-only and open-world, which are consistent. 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?

Three sentences with no waste: first states purpose, second lists statuses and result structure, third provides polling guidance. Front-loaded and efficient.

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 one parameter, annotations, and no output schema, the description covers all needed context: status values, result/error handling, and polling frequency. No gaps.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description restates the parameter's origin (from generate/upscale) but adds no new meaning beyond the schema.

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 it polls a generation or upscale task by ID, specifies status values, and explains result/error fields. It distinguishes from sibling tools like vicsee_generate (creates tasks) and vicsee_upscale_* (creates tasks) by focusing on polling.

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 tells when to use (after generation/upscale) and to poll every few seconds until done. It does not explicitly list alternatives or when not to use, but the context from sibling tools makes it clear it's for polling only.

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