invenio_get_search_task

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden but discloses almost nothing: it doesn't say whether incomplete tasks return partial results or an error, whether the call is read-only or long-running, or what happens with an invalid task_id. Only the implicit 'Get' framing suggests a read operation.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler. It is efficient, though the terseness borders on under-specification rather than genuine conciseness.

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?

There is no output schema and no annotations, so the description should convey what is returned (findings, counts, status), whether results are paginated, and how to handle a task that isn't finished. None of that is present, leaving an agent unable to predict the response.

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%, so baseline is 3; the schema itself only says 'Task ID.', which adds no real semantics. The description doesn't compensate by indicating where the task_id comes from (e.g., the value returned by invenio_create_search_task) or its format.

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 a specific verb+resource: 'Get results' for an 'OSINT search task'. This is clearly distinct from siblings like invenio_create_search_task or invenio_get_account_status, so an agent can identify it without ambiguity. It stops short of 5 because it doesn't describe what 'results' contains or the task lifecycle.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to call this, whether the task must be completed first, or how it relates to invenio_create_search_task. The relationship (call after creating a task) is only inferable from the noun 'task' and the required task_id parameter.

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