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

No annotations provided. Description only states 'reads' but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as permission requirements, error conditions, or side effects. This is insufficient for a tool with no 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?

Single sentence with no fluff. Front-loaded with verb and resource. Every word is necessary.

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, the description adequately explains purpose and return fields. Lacks a note on potential errors or network dependencies, but sufficient 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 has 100% coverage with description for tokenAddress. Description adds value by listing the exact metadata fields returned (name, symbol, decimals, totalSupply), clarifying what the tool provides beyond the address parameter.

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 the tool reads name, symbol, decimals, and totalSupply for an ERC-20 token on Fuse. The verb 'reads' and specific resource differentiate it from sibling tools like fuse_deploy_contract or fuse_get_balance.

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. Usage is implied by the simple read nature, but lacks mention of prerequisites or exclusions.

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