hederaContractIdToEvmAddressConvert a Hedera contract ID in '0.0.x' realm-shard-num form to its 0x-prefixed EVM address representation. Pure conversion — does not query the network.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| contractId | Yes | Hedera contract ID in 'shard.realm.num' form (e.g. '0.0.731861'). |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds meaningful behavioral context by stating 'does not query the network,' which goes beyond the annotations and reassures the agent of no network dependencies or side effects.
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?
Single sentence with the verb 'Convert' at the start, followed by concise details. Every phrase earns its place; no filler or unnecessary repetition.
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?
For a simple conversion tool with one parameter, no output schema, and full annotations, the description is sufficient. It clearly states the input format, the output representation, and the pure nature, allowing correct selection and invocation without ambiguity.
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 100% with a clear description of the only parameter (contractId). The tool description repeats the format '0.0.x' but does not add additional semantics beyond the schema's 'shard.realm.num' form, so it meets the baseline without enhancement.
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 uses specific verb 'Convert' and identifies the exact resource transformation (Hedera contract ID in realm-shard-num form to 0x-prefixed EVM address). It implicitly distinguishes from sibling hederaAccountIdToEvmAddress by specifying 'contract ID' rather than 'account ID'.
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?
States 'Pure conversion — does not query the network,' which clarifies appropriate use for offline conversions. However, it does not explicitly mention alternative tools like hederaAccountIdToEvmAddress or provide 'when not to use' guidance, so it falls short of full exclusion.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
With 113 tools spanning many chains and asset classes, there is substantial overlap. For example, listPositions and getAllPositions appear to serve the same function, and there are many balance, token discovery, and collection data tools that differ mostly by chain or protocol, making misselection likely.
Naming conventions are inconsistent: most tools use camelCase with a verb (baseGetBalances, ethSwapQuote), but some use underscores (nansen_defi_portfolio), others are just bare nouns (wallet, rugcheck), and there are irregularities like solanaBalances instead of solanaGetBalances, plus hederaTokensSwapQuote vs. baseSwapQuote.
The server exposes 113 tools, far beyond the typical well-scoped set. This is an extreme mismatch with the apparent purpose of a wallet/swap server, making discovery and selection difficult for agents.
While the server offers extensive read-only data (balances, market data, NFTs, positions), it lacks core write operations: there is no actual swap execution or token transfer tool, and the referenced emblemCreateVault tool is missing. These are significant gaps that will prevent agents from completing common wallet actions.