fastmean_get_result

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=true, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), so the description only needs to add context. It does add that the response includes images and registered artifact resources, which is useful, but says nothing about behavior when run_id is unknown or results were not persisted.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with zero filler. Its brevity is appropriate in form, though it leans toward under-specification rather than genuine concision.

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?

With no output schema, the description partially fills the gap by naming the return content (images, artifact resources). However, it omits the meaning of run_id, failure modes, and how to locate a valid run, leaving notable holes for a retrieval tool.

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?

The single required parameter run_id has 0% schema description coverage and the description never mentions it, so the agent gets no explanation of what a run_id is or where to obtain it. With a coverage gap this low, the description should compensate and does not.

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 verb 'Reopen' plus resource 'a persisted result' gives a rough purpose, but 'persisted result' is undefined and the tool name's 'get_result' framing is only loosely reflected. It does not clearly distinguish itself from siblings like fastmean_list_runs, fastmean_status, or fastmean_open, so an agent cannot confidently tell what uniquely this returns.

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?

There is no guidance on when to call this versus fastmean_list_runs (to discover a run_id), fastmean_status, or fastmean_open. No prerequisites, no error/precondition notes, and no mention that a run must have been persisted first.

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