job_result

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

The description discloses the two possible returns (result or notice), which is helpful given no annotations. However, it does not cover error cases like invalid job_id, permission requirements, or rate limits.

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, clear sentence that conveys the core purpose without unnecessary words. It is well-structured and front-loaded.

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 one parameter, no annotations, and an output schema (not shown), the description covers the basic behavior but lacks context on prerequisites, workflow integration, or error handling. Adequate but incomplete.

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 description only implicitly references the job_id parameter. The input schema provides no description for job_id, so the description adds little beyond the parameter name. No format, source, or validation hints are given.

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 returns the result of a finished background job or a notice if still running. This distinguishes it from sibling tool job_status, which likely returns only status, not data.

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 usage after a job has finished, but does not explicitly explain when to choose this over job_status or other siblings. No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned.

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