get_result

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses blocking behavior up to timeout_s and polling, but does not mention error handling, rate limits, idempotency, or whether it's read-only. Basic behavioral info is present.

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 with a clarifying note. It is efficient and front-loaded with the core action, though the loop reference adds some extraneous context for a multi-step process.

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 polling tool with two parameters and an output schema, the description covers the core behavior (blocking, output format, follow-up with get_image). It lacks details on error cases or timeout handling, but the output schema likely documents return values.

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 has 0% description coverage, so description must compensate. It explains timeout_s as the blocking duration, and the prompt_id is implicitly the identifier for the submitted prompt. This adds meaning beyond the schema's titles.

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 polls /history for a submitted prompt and returns output files, specifying the action (poll), resource (history for a prompt), and result (output files). It distinguishes from siblings like get_image (which views pixels) and get_node (which gets node info).

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 says to use after submitting a prompt, blocks up to timeout_s, and directs to feed outputs to get_image. It implies when to use but does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives.

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