Read a specific block by its share_token (the permanent URL slug at /b/). Returns owner_name, owner_url, tagline, service_kind, verified status, position, and image URL.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| share_token | Yes | The share_token from /b/<share_token> |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, description carries full burden. It lists returned fields but does not disclose error behavior (e.g., invalid token), rate limits, or auth requirements. Adequate but not exhaustive.
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 the primary action. No unnecessary words. Efficient and well-structured.
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 read tool with one parameter and no output schema, description explains purpose and return fields. Lacks error handling and full response structure, but adequate given low complexity.
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% (one parameter fully described). Description adds context by explaining share_token as 'the permanent URL slug', which adds slight value beyond 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?
Description clearly states 'Read a specific block by its share_token', identifying the verb (read) and resource (block). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'claim_block' (write) and 'find_empty_blocks' (list).
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?
No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It implies reading a single block but does not mention exclusions or scenarios where other tools are better suited.
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 serves a distinct purpose: block discovery, pricing, claiming, reading, survey operations, and service listing. No two tools are ambiguous in their function.
Most tools follow a verb_noun pattern (e.g., claim_block, get_block, list_services). The only outlier is 'price_check' which reverses the order, but it's still clear.
8 tools is well-scoped for the canvas domain, covering discovery, pricing, claiming, surveys, and service listing without overcomplicating the surface.
Core workflows (discover, price, claim, survey, list services) are covered. Missing a tool to register or update services, but the overall surface feels complete for the intended use.