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?
Description adds value beyond annotations by clarifying no model execution and no token requirement. No contradictions with 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?
Two sentences, front-loaded with return values, 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?
All relevant information provided: return fields, non-execution nature, authentication requirement. Adequate for a zero-parameter metadata 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?
No parameters, baseline score 4. Description doesn't need to elaborate on parameter meaning.
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 'Returns' and lists concrete resources (identity, per-task price, MCP endpoint, access URL). Clearly distinguishes from sibling tools which are about run creation and status.
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?
Explicitly states 'does not run the model' and 'does not require a bearer token', guiding when to call it. Could be improved by mentioning alternatives, but given context it's clear.
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 targets a distinct concern: identity metadata, run creation, status polling, result retrieval, and cancellation. There is no overlap or ambiguity about which tool to call for a given step.
All tools share the agentfarm_ prefix and use a consistent verb_noun pattern (create_run, get_run_status, get_run_result, cancel_run, agent_info). The naming is predictable and uniform.
Five tools form a tight, purposeful surface for managing asynchronous agent farm runs. The set is neither bloated nor too thin for its stated purpose.
The server covers the essential async run lifecycle: create, poll status, retrieve results, and cancel. A list-runs or historical deletion endpoint is missing, but core workflows do not dead-end.