Get scrape job results

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. The description adds valuable non-obvious behavior: 'Does not spend credits — safe to call repeatedly,' which is crucial for polling. It also clarifies the two-phase nature (status check then fetch).

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 two sentences: first states purpose, second states cost/safety. Every word earns its place; no redundancy or filler.

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?

For a simple tool with one parameter and strong annotations, the description covers purpose, polling behavior, cost impact, and parameter origin. It does not describe the response format, but since no output schema exists, a mention of business records being fetched is reasonable. Minor gap on exact return structure.

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 100% with job_id described as 'Job id returned by start_scrape_job or scrape_google_maps.' The description adds no further parameter details, so baseline 3 applies. It does reinforce provenance, but that information already exists in the schema.

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's function: 'Check the status of a scrape job and fetch the business records once it is complete.' It uses a specific verb-resource pair and distinguishes itself from siblings like start_scrape_job (which initiates) and get_credits (which queries balance).

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 starting a job, especially through the parameter reference to 'start_scrape_job or scrape_google_maps.' It clearly conveys when to use (to check status and fetch results), but does not explicitly discuss exclusions or alternatives beyond the implied workflow.

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