get_result

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=false. The description adds context by specifying that the tool returns metrics and trades, which is beyond the annotations. It does not contradict annotations.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and the key parameter nuance. No superfluous words.

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 only one parameter and an output schema (not shown), the description is minimal but sufficient for a simple retrieval tool. However, it lacks guidance on how this tool differs from siblings like get_strategy or list_results, which may be needed for correct selection.

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 0%, so the description carries the burden. It adds that result_id can be a strategy_id or run_id, providing some meaning beyond the schema. However, it does not specify format, constraints, or example values, leaving ambiguity.

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 tool retrieves 'metrics and trades' for a saved backtest result, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_strategy or list_results by specifying the resource and action. The parenthetical on result_id clarifies the valid identifier types.

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 implies that result_id can be a strategy_id or run_id, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like get_strategy or list_results. No exclusions or contextual cues for selection are provided.

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