check_basic_metadata

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses the returned fields (title, duration, thumbnail) once the job completes, implying a read-only status check. However, it doesn't describe the response before completion, error handling, or whether the job is consumed, leaving some behavioral ambiguity.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, and every clause earns its place. No 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 simple polling tool, the description covers the main purpose and final output, but lacks details about the intermediate status response and error behavior. With no output schema, this is a notable gap, though the tool's low complexity keeps it acceptable.

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 coverage is 100% and the jobId parameter description already explains its origin. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond confirming it's for a get_basic_metadata job, 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 checks the status of a get_basic_metadata job, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like check_metadata by explicitly scoping to get_basic_metadata jobs, and adds output details.

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 the tool is used after calling get_basic_metadata, and the parameter description reinforces that jobId comes from that call. However, it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use, but the context is clear given sibling tools.

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