get_job_result

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

No annotations exist, so description bears full behavioral disclosure. It warns about untrusted external data, which is helpful, but does not clarify if the tool mutates state, blocks, or any permission requirements. The timeout and lookback parameters hint at waiting behavior but are not explained.

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 concise sentences with clear purpose and a warning. No fluff, but the warning could be integrated better. Front-loads the main purpose.

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?

Five parameters and no output schema. The description is too brief for a polling tool; it lacks details on result format, error handling, or how to interpret the return value. The warning is crucial but incomplete for full usage understanding.

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 only 20% (only lookback_secs described). The description adds meaning for job_event_id (implicitly) and lookback_secs, but other three parameters (provider_npub, kind_offset, timeout_secs) are left unexplained.

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?

Description clearly states the tool checks the result of a previously submitted job by its event ID. The verb 'check' and resource 'job result' are specific, and it distinguishes from siblings like submit_and_pay_job or list_my_jobs.

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?

Description implies usage context (after job submission) and mentions configurable lookback, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor when not to use it.

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