Get Cell Outputs

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose one genuinely useful non-obvious behavior — unresolved IDs surface in missing_cell_ids so an empty cell is distinguishable from a nonexistent one — but says nothing about output size limits, truncation, pagination, or whether retrieval has side effects.

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?

Two sentences, front-loading the core purpose before the edge-case note, with no filler. The second sentence is slightly roundabout in phrasing but every clause adds 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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and all three parameters are schema-documented. The missing-id behavior is covered; the only gap is guidance on selecting this tool over sibling readers and any limits on output volume.

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 100%, so cell_ids, server_url, and session_id are already fully documented in the schema. The description adds no semantics on top of that (it does not even restate the empty-means-all-cells default), so the baseline of 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 (get cell execution outputs) and enumerates what those outputs contain (visual display, console streams). It does not name or contrast with the nearest siblings (get_errors, get_cell_data, run_cell), so an agent must infer the boundary itself.

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?

The description says what is retrievable but never states when to call this instead of get_cell_data or get_errors, nor any prerequisite such as having run the cell first. Usage is only implied by the resource name.

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