Skip to main content
Glama

Get the result of an estimate you already requested

get_estimate_result
Read-onlyIdempotent

Reads one estimate you already requested, by its estimate_id. Use this when a tier-3 (deep research) estimate came back with status "pending" and you want to know whether it is finished, or to show an earlier estimate again. Tier-3 results are only delivered this way (or to a callback_url, which chat clients usually cannot receive).

Returns status: "pending" (with retry_after_seconds: how long to wait before asking again), "completed" (with the same fields a finished estimate returns), or "failed" (with error_detail; any credits taken are refunded).

You can only read estimates made with the same credentials. Without an account you are recognised by IP address and browser or client, so a different network or client may not find the estimate. To find an id you lost, use list_my_estimates. Not for: making a new estimate.

Cost: free. Reading a result never spends anything.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "estimate_id": "<estimate_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_estimate_result"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
api_keyNoThe same api_key used when the estimate was requested (omit it if none was used, or if your connector is signed in). Estimates are visible only to the credentials that made them.
estimate_idYesThe estimate_id returned by estimate_quantity_or_probability or listed by list_my_estimates.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
modelNoModel that produced it.
statusNoOnly on results that are not finished yet or that come from get_estimate_result: "pending" (tier 3 still running), "completed" or "failed".
billingNoWho this call was billed to and what is left. Present on every Fermi result.
tier_idNoThe tier that produced it (1, 2 or 3).
providerNoAI provider that produced it.
range_lowNoSame as estimation_interval.low.
created_atNoWhen it was made (ISO 8601).
disclaimerNoNot financial advice notice.
next_stepsNoReady-made input for neumann, Kromatic's Monte Carlo simulation server. simulate.root_node (distribution_type and distribution_params) can be added to a neumann model as one uncertain input; when the family has no direct neumann match, simulate.solve_args are the arguments for neumann's convert_range_to_distribution instead. simulate.note says which, and simulate.mcp_url is the neumann server to call.
range_highNoSame as estimation_interval.high.
request_idNoId of this request, for support.
assumptionsNoThe assumptions the estimate rests on.
estimate_idNoId of this estimate, for get_estimate_result and list_my_estimates.
error_detailNoWhen failed: what went wrong.
point_estimateNoThe single best value. For a yes/no question asked with unit "probability (0-1)", this is the probability that the event happens (0.15 = 15%).
credits_chargedNoCredits this estimate cost (0 without an account).
confidence_levelNoSet only from coverage_probability: "high" for 0.95 or more, "medium" for 0.9 up to 0.95, "low" below 0.9. It is not a judgement of the estimate's quality.
credits_refundedNoWhen failed: credits given back.
research_sourcesNoTiers 2 and 3: web sources used (url, title, snippet, relevance_note).
reasoning_summaryNoHow the estimate was reached, in a few sentences.
verification_flagsNoTier 3: issues the second check raised.
distribution_familyNoShape of the fitted probability distribution: normal, log_normal (positive and right-skewed), uniform, constant, beta (values between 0 and 1, used for probabilities and rates), triangle, gamma, exponential or poisson (counts).
estimation_intervalNoThe range that should contain the true value with probability coverage_probability. For a probability question, both ends are probabilities between 0 and 1.
retry_after_secondsNoWhen pending: seconds to wait before reading it again.
coverage_probabilityNoChance the interval contains the true value (0.9 = 90%).
verification_summaryNoTier 3: what a second check found.
distribution_parametersNoParameters of that distribution by name, e.g. alpha and beta for beta, mu and sigma for log_normal.
decomposition_suggestionsNoSub-questions (sub_question, reasoning) worth estimating separately to sharpen this one. Each would be a new estimate call at the usual cost.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive); the description adds the substantive behavior: the three status outcomes, retry_after_seconds on pending, error_detail with credit refund on failure, credential/IP-based visibility scoping, and that the call is free. The refund-on-failure and credential-scoping details are exactly the kind of non-obvious context an agent cannot infer from annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with purpose, then polling behavior, then access caveats, then the exclusion — a sensible ordering. Minor redundancy remains: the title already says "an estimate you already requested," and the cost point is stated twice ("Cost: free. Reading a result never spends anything.").

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Even though an output schema exists and return values need not be explained, the description covers everything needed to poll correctly: status vocabulary, retry timing, failure/refund semantics, and cross-client visibility limits. Nothing an agent needs in order to call this correctly is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented; the description nonetheless adds provenance for estimate_id (returned by estimate_quantity_or_probability or list_my_estimates) and reinforces why api_key must match the original request. It stops short of adding format or validation detail beyond the schema, so it sits just above the baseline.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource — reads one previously requested estimate by estimate_id — and immediately scopes it away from siblings with "Not for: making a new estimate." An agent can distinguish it from estimate_quantity_or_probability and list_my_estimates without opening either schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives concrete triggering conditions (tier-3 estimate returned "pending", or re-displaying an earlier result) and names the alternative paths: callback_url delivery and list_my_estimates for recovering a lost id. Exclusions are explicit rather than implied.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources