daily_brief_result

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Transparently describes the four possible statuses and their implications, including security-conscious error handling (omitting message). Discloses expected polling behavior.

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?

Short and front-loaded with the main purpose. Uses code formatting for clarity. Every sentence adds value; no unnecessary words.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (1 param, no output schema), the description sufficiently covers the polling mechanism and response structure. Lacks only some detail on the 'result' payload, but acceptable for a poll-for-result 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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so description must compensate. It mentions fetching 'by id' but does not elaborate on the job_id parameter's format, constraints, or source. Limited added value beyond the parameter name.

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?

Clearly states it fetches a daily_brief_start job by id. Distinguishes from siblings like daily_brief_start (which creates the job) and other unrelated tools.

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?

Explains polling logic: status values and actions (running->poll, done->parse result, error->handle error type, unknown->bad id). Provides clear context for use after starting a job, but doesn't explicitly compare with siblings.

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