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

No annotations provided; description lacks behavioral details such as authentication requirements, rate limits, or response structure, which is critical for a read operation.

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, front-loaded with verb, no wasted words. However, more structure could improve readability.

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?

Without output schema or annotations, the description leaves gaps: no definition of trust score, no explanation of includeDetails, and no indication of response format.

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 0%, and the description only lists subject types without explaining subjectValue or includeDetails, failing to add meaningful context beyond the schema.

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?

Clearly states 'Get trust score' and lists three specific subject types (wallet, agent card URL, domain), distinguishing from related tools like batch query or feedback.

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 for single trust score queries but gives no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over siblings like agent_trust_batch or agent_trust_feedback.

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