Get Processing Result as ALTO XML

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

Annotations already declare this as a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive operation. The description adds useful behavioral detail beyond annotations by disclosing the 404 behavior for unfinished jobs, though it omits other operational details such as auth requirements or result size.

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?

Two short sentences are front-loaded with the core purpose and then the key operational caveat. There is no redundant or filler language.

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 one-parameter retrieval tool with rich annotations and complete schema coverage, the description supplies enough context: what it returns, the required job state, and the error behavior while the job is running. No output schema exists, so return-value explanation is not required.

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 single processId parameter is fully documented in the schema as the ID returned when the image was submitted. The description does not add further meaning beyond that baseline.

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 verb, resource, and output format: get a finished Processing API result as ALTO v4 XML. This distinguishes it from sibling processing tools such as status and page XML retrieval without requiring the schema to be opened.

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?

It gives clear context by stating the job must be finished and that a 404 is returned while still running, which tells the agent when the tool can be used. It does not explicitly name polling or alternative sibling tools, so it falls short of full when/when-not/alternatives guidance.

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