ops_result

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. "Release the reference" hints at a stateful server-side handle, but the description never says the reference becomes invalid afterward, whether release is required to free resources, or that responses can be truncated by max_bytes. Those are consequential behaviors left unstated.

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 dense sentence that front-loads the core verb and the two modes, with no filler. The semicolon-separated parameter list is compact and readable, though the list-heavy phrasing costs some clarity.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. For an 11-parameter, zero-coverage tool with a stateful reference handle, however, the description leaves release semantics, truncation behavior, and the origin of details_ref unexplained.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does map several filters (fields, step_ids, operations, states, path_prefix, grep_many queries) to parameters and adds the useful "literal" qualifier for path_prefix. However, it omits the required details_ref, max_bytes truncation semantics, and limit/offset paging behavior.

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 and resource ("Retrieve batch results") plus the filter dimensions available and the alternate action ("release the reference"). It never names or distinguishes itself from the sibling ops_batch, so an agent must infer the division of labor between them.

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 lists the two action modes but gives no condition for choosing between them: nothing says when to page versus when to release, or whether release is a cleanup step that must follow retrieval. No prerequisites or exclusion versus ops_batch are provided.

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