Poll an async job started by omnarai_query or omnarai_trace. Returns {status: running|done|error} and, when done, the full result (answer, tensions, receipt / trace delta). Poll every ~5 seconds; jobs typically finish in 30–60s.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| job_id | Yes | The job_id returned by omnarai_query or omnarai_trace. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses status states (running|done|error), return structure, and polling behavior. Could mention error handling but adequate.
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?
Single efficient paragraph, front-loaded key info, 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?
No output schema but description fully explains what is returned. Polling details and timing make it complete for an async polling tool.
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?
Only one parameter (job_id) with 100% schema coverage. Schema already explains it's returned by sibling tools. Description adds no further semantic value beyond what schema provides.
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 an async job started by specific sibling tools, and returns status and result. It distinguishes itself from siblings that start jobs.
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?
Provides explicit context: use after omnarai_query or omnarai_trace, poll every 5 seconds, jobs finish in 30-60s. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use but covers main usage scenario.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: context for bounded retrieval, council for live panel, divergence for reading existing records, info for meta-data, inquiry_brief for converting drafts, job for polling async tasks, query for async queries, and trace for counterfactual analysis. No overlap.
All tools follow a consistent 'omnarai_<noun>' pattern in snake_case (context, council, divergence, info, inquiry_brief, job, query, trace). No mixed styles or irregular verbs.
8 tools is well-scoped for a knowledge retrieval and deliberation system. It covers retrieval, live panel, divergence records, meta-info, inbox brief generation, async job polling, query execution, and tracing without unnecessary redundancy.
The tool surface covers core workflows: retrieval, deliberation, async job management, and meta-information. The only minor gap is the absence of tools for modifying or updating corpus data, but this aligns with the server's apparent read-only nature. Comprehensive for its stated purpose.