gateway.tasks_result

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions output redaction/truncation behavior by reference to gateway.invoke, but does not explain that behavior or disclose other traits like idempotency, permissions, or error conditions. Insufficient for a fetch operation.

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 a single sentence, which is concise but under-specified. It lacks structure and front-loads no additional details beyond purpose. Every sentence should earn its place; here it barely provides enough information.

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 the tool has nested parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is far from complete. It fails to address return values, error cases, prerequisites, or the relationship to tasks_get. Significant gaps remain.

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 0%, and the description does not explain any parameter meanings. It does not clarify what server_name refers to, how task_id is obtained, or what the options fields (redact_secrets, max_output_chars) do. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema structure.

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 explicitly states the verb 'Fetch' and the resource 'downstream MCP task result', making the purpose clear. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'tasks_get', which might have a similar function. Thus not a perfect 5.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like tasks_get, tasks_list, or tasks_cancel. The only hint is the similarity to invoke, but lacks explicit context for when this tool is appropriate.

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