connections_get_geocheck_result

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state that this is a read-only operation, what the result looks like, or whether it is idempotent. The description is too terse to convey any behavioral traits beyond the literal 'get'.

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, concise sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, making it easy to parse.

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 simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description is minimal but leaves gaps. It does not explain the workflow (e.g., that this retrieves results after starting a geocheck), nor does it describe the return format, which the agent needs to know since there is no output schema.

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?

The schema description coverage is 100%, and the parameter jobId is adequately described as 'Job ID from connections_geocheck'. The tool description adds no additional semantic information beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 action ('Get result') and the resource ('a geocheck job'), which distinguishes it from the sibling connections_geocheck (which starts a job). However, it does not explain what 'geocheck' means, leaving some ambiguity for agents unfamiliar with the domain.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that it should be called after connections_geocheck, nor does it clarify differences from connections_get_user_result or connections_get_node_result.

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