Get the results of a completed bulk job

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden. It discloses the return content (per-address results, summary, credits used) and the precondition (only for completed jobs). It does not mention error behavior or side-effects, but 'fetch' implies read-only, and the main traits are covered.

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 the core action and return contents, second gives the necessary precondition. No redundant words, and it is front-loaded with the 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?

For a single-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description is complete enough to invoke correctly. It specifies the resource, return values, and usage condition. It could add pagination or error details, but these are not essential for basic use.

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% and the parameter description already explains job_id as returned by submit_bulk. The description adds no extra semantic detail about the parameter, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 fetches full per-address results of a completed bulk verification job, listing specific data fields (verdict, recommendation, reason) and the summary/credits used. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_job_status (status) and list_jobs (job list).

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 explicitly states the job must be 'completed' and instructs to 'check get_job_status first', providing a clear precondition and directing the agent to the relevant sibling tool. It does not contrast with all alternatives, but the key ambiguity is resolved.

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