Fetch a collected corpus

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

With no annotations the description must carry the load, and it does disclose non-obvious traits: the call is non-blocking and reports an in-progress run instead of hanging, the artifact is validated before return, and the buildAuthorized flag is false for freshly collected corpora with an explicit do-not-build consequence. It omits permission/auth requirements and failure modes for private repositories.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then the non-blocking behavior, then the critical buildAuthorized warning. No filler sentences to cut.

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 exists, and the description covers the important return elements (a link plus the buildAuthorized flag), but it leaves the rest of the response shape unspecified. Adequate for a simple fetch tool, though a bit more on the returned result would close the gap.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters including out_dir's default. The description adds no syntax or format detail about repository or workflow_run_id beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource chain — fetch the artifact a completed collection produced, validate it, return a link. That is clearly distinct from the sibling `collect`, which produces the collection in the first place.

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?

Implies the precondition (only after a collection has completed) and adds a decisive downstream rule: when buildAuthorized is false, do not build from this. It never names `collect` as the alternative or states exclusions explicitly, which keeps it short of a 5.

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