Skip to main content
Glama

Read a bid check result

get_bid_check_result
Read-only

Read the result of a check_bid_fit job using its result token. Returns the status and, when complete, the fit verdict, the score out of 10, the factor breakdown, the top reasons, and the top gaps. Free, no sign-in.

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": {
      "token": "<token>"
    },
    "name": "get_bid_check_result"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tokenYesResult token returned by check_bid_fit.
resumeNoSet true to restart a stalled job.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

readOnlyHint=true already establishes the safety profile, and the description adds real value on top: the exact result payload (status, verdict, score out of 10, factor breakdown, reasons, gaps), the fact that fields are only populated when the job is complete, and the auth/cost posture ('Free, no sign-in'). It stops short of covering token lifetime, expiration, or polling cadence.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the verb and resource, then the return shape, then the access constraint. Every sentence carries information an agent cannot get from the schema or annotations.

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

Completeness4/5

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

With no output schema, the description correctly compensates by enumerating the returned fields and the partial-vs-complete distinction. A minor gap remains around token lifetime and whether a token can be reused across repeated polls.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented in the schema. The description only restates that a result token is needed and says nothing about the 'resume' flag for stalled jobs, so baseline 3 applies with no meaningful additive meaning.

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 (Read) plus the exact resource (the result of a check_bid_fit job) and ties it to the producer tool by name, which separates it from the analogous get_shred_result sibling without needing the schema.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The phrase 'when complete' plus 'using its result token' implies the polling workflow: call check_bid_fit, then re-call this with the returned token until status resolves. It gives clear usage context but no explicit when-not guidance, and no naming of alternatives for retrieving results.

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.