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

Without annotations, the description clearly states it is a read operation, implying no side effects or destructive actions. However, it could be improved by noting behavior on missing tokens or error conditions.

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 concise sentence with no superfluous words, effectively communicating the tool's purpose.

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?

No output schema is provided, but the description explicitly names the returned fields (name, symbol, decimals, totalSupply), giving a complete picture of the output. For a simple one-parameter tool, this is sufficient.

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% with a clear description for tokenAddress. The tool description does not add additional parameter semantics beyond the schema, but the schema itself is sufficient.

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 a specific verb 'Reads' and explicitly lists the fields (name, symbol, decimals, totalSupply) for an ERC-20 token on Fuse, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like fuse_get_balance or fuse_get_token_price.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description is purely functional and does not mention any prerequisites, alternatives, or when not to use it.

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