runtime_smoke_get_result

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

Annotations already include readOnlyHint=true, indicating a safe read operation. Description adds that it returns the 'final' envelope upon completion, but does not disclose behaviors like whether it blocks or requires a valid run state. With annotations present, the description contributes marginally.

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?

Extremely concise, one sentence. Front-loaded with key information. However, it could be slightly improved by including parameter context without major length increase.

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 one parameter, no output schema, and many sibling runtime_smoke tools, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what a 'runtime smoke envelope' is, how to obtain a valid run_id, or the expected sequence of calls. Lacks sufficient context for an agent to use it correctly.

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% for the single parameter 'run_id'. The description does not explain what run_id refers to (e.g., from runtime_smoke_start) or any constraints. For a parameter with no schema description, the tool description should compensate but fails to do so.

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?

Description clearly states it returns the final runtime smoke envelope when a durable run completes. Verb 'Return' and specific resource 'final runtime smoke envelope' are identifiable, but it does not differentiate from sibling tools like runtime_smoke_validate_probe or runtime_smoke_wait_for_result.

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?

Implies usage when a durable run completes, but does not explicitly state when to call it (e.g., after runtime_smoke_run_plan) or when not to use it. No alternatives or exclusions mentioned, leaving ambiguity among the many runtime_smoke siblings.

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