Collect a Grid AI research request

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and delivers real behavioral context: the wait/polling semantics, the one-hour retention window, and the constraint that only the originating API key can read the result. It omits error behavior for expired or unknown ids, but the operational constraints disclosed are substantive.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with what is returned, then the usage trigger, then the retention/auth caveat. No sentence is redundant and nothing is buried.

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 two-parameter poll tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers return contents, timing, retention and auth. It stops short of describing the shape of the returned data or the failure mode when an id is expired, but is otherwise sufficient to call correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%, and the schema fully documents both `id` and `waitSeconds` (default, range, meaning). The description merely echoes the wait behavior already stated in the schema, so the baseline 3 is correct.

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 states a specific retrieval purpose — returning the sources, excerpts and analysis of a research request by id — and names the sibling `research` as the tool that starts such a request. An agent can distinguish it from the sibling without opening either schema.

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?

"Use it when the research tool returned before the request finished" gives an explicit trigger condition tied to a named sibling. It does not state when not to use it or what happens if the request has already been collected, but the main routing decision is clear.

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