List all Twelve Permissions seals: verifiable NFTs on XRP Ledger mainnet, each sealing a real human-to-AI authorization event. Returns names, prices, live offer indexes, and sold status.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of disclosure. It adds context by specifying the domain (XRP Ledger mainnet) and the returned fields (names, prices, live offer indexes, sold status). However, it does not explicitly state that this is a read-only operation, nor does it mention any limitations, rate limits, or authentication requirements. The behavior is largely predictable from the verb 'list', but the description doesn't fully disclose potential side effects or constraints.
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 a single informative sentence that names the resource, provides domain context, and enumerates the return fields without any redundancy or fluff.
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 listing tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description adequately conveys what the tool does and what it returns. It could be slightly more explicit about the read-only nature or any default ordering/filtering, but it covers the essential context.
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 takes no parameters, so the schema is trivially complete. The description's mention of return fields is useful but not parameter semantics. Baseline for 0 params is 4, and there is nothing missing.
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 uses the specific verb 'List' with the resource 'all Twelve Permissions seals' and clarifies what these seals are (verifiable NFTs on XRP Ledger mainnet), effectively distinguishing this from sibling tools like get_piece which likely target a single seal.
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 implies this tool is for viewing the full collection ('List all'), but it does not explicitly state when to use this over alternatives like get_piece, verify_seal, etc. There is no explicit exclusion or alternative naming, so the usage guidance is implied rather than explicit.
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 unique, clearly defined purpose: listing, single-item retrieval, purchase transaction construction, USDC payment info, refusal ledger access, and verification. No two tools overlap in functionality, and the descriptions clearly distinguish the two purchase-related tools (XRPL vs. USDC/HTTP).
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (get_*, list_*, verify_*), with 'get' used for retrieval and specific actions named with clear nouns. The minor variation (list vs. get) is standard and predictable.
Six tools is a well-scoped size for this niche collection server. Each tool covers a distinct part of the user journey (browse, inspect, purchase, verify, and inspect constraints), with no redundancy or bloat.
The server covers the full lifecycle for interacting with the Twelve Permissions collection: listing, individual metadata retrieval, two purchase methods (XRP and USDC), verification, and additionally the refusals ledger. There are no obvious gaps for the stated domain of viewing and buying these NFTs.