get_job_result

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses default lookback (24h), configurable range (up to 7 days), non-error 'still processing' notice, result persistence on relays, and a warning that result content is untrusted external data.

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 pack essential information: purpose, lookback details, polling behavior, and a security warning. No wasted words; front-loaded with the core verb and resource.

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?

Covers return behavior ('still processing' notice, untrusted content) and persistence. No output schema, so description handles return values adequately. Could mention that the result is the job output, but sufficient for a checking tool.

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 20% (only lookback_secs has description). The description adds meaning to job_event_id (primary identifier) and mentions lookback_secs default/range, but does not explain kind_offset, timeout_secs, or provider_npub. Partially compensates but not fully.

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 the specific verb 'check' and resource 'result of a previously submitted job by its event ID'. Clearly differentiates from sibling tools like submit_and_pay_job or list_my_jobs by focusing on retrieval of results.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: after submitting a job. Provides polling guidance ('retry later... poll periodically'). Does not exclude other scenarios or name alternatives, but the context is clear that this is for checking results.

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