agentfarm_agent_infoReturns this agent's identity, listed per-task price, MCP endpoint, and access URL. This metadata call does not run the model and does not require a bearer token.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint and idempotentHint. The description adds that it does not run the model and does not require a bearer token, providing additional behavioral transparency beyond annotations.
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 two sentences, efficiently conveying the returned items and key behavioral traits. No extraneous content.
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 no parameters and sufficient annotations, the description covers the essential return values and behavioral notes. No gaps identified.
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 tool has zero parameters, so the description does not need to elaborate on parameter semantics. Baseline score of 4 applies per instructions.
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 explicitly states the tool returns agent identity, per-task price, MCP endpoint, and access URL. It clarifies this is a metadata call that does not run the model. The verb 'returns' is clear, and it distinguishes from sibling tools that deal with runs.
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 description notes that the call does not run the model and does not require a bearer token, implying it should be used when metadata is needed without model execution. While it does not explicitly mention when not to use, the context of sibling tools for runs provides clear differentiation.
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.
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: metadata lookup, task creation, status polling, result retrieval, and cancellation. There is no meaningful overlap between any of the tools.
Tool names follow a consistent agentfarm_ prefix and mostly use verb_noun patterns like create_run, cancel_run, get_run_status, and get_run_result. agentfarm_agent_info is a slight deviation since it lacks an explicit verb, but the pattern remains clear and predictable.
Five tools is well-scoped for an asynchronous agent-run lifecycle. Each tool serves a necessary step in the workflow without redundancy or bloat.
The surface covers the full async task lifecycle: create, monitor, retrieve, and cancel, plus agent metadata. No obvious gaps prevent an agent from completing the intended workflow.