get_job_result

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose whether this operation is read-only, whether it can block or wait, whether it errors on incomplete jobs, or any other behavioral details. The full burden falls on the description, which does not carry it.

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?

The description is very short and front-loaded, containing no unnecessary words. It is concise, though it sacrifices informative content for brevity.

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?

The description gives only a minimal high-level context. It does not explain how to obtain a job_id, what the returned result looks like, or how this tool relates to get_job_status beyond the word 'finished'.

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 parameter job_id is only defined by its name and schema type. The description adds no meaning about where the job_id comes from, its expected format, or how it relates to other async job tools.

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 clearly indicates this tool provides the result of an async job, distinguishing it from get_job_status which would report status. However, it lacks an explicit verb like 'returns' or 'retrieves', making it a noun phrase rather than a full action statement.

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 phrase 'finished async job' implies usage should occur after job completion, but it does not explicitly direct the agent to check status first via get_job_status or mention any alternatives. The guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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