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

Beyond the read-only and closed-world annotations, it explains that the result is produced locally from fixed canonical deployment information. The explicit statement that no Sky service, RPC, indexer, or third-party API is proxied makes the lack of live retrieval or external dependency unusually clear.

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 compact sentences front-load the returned resource and then disclose the local, non-proxy behavior. Every phrase contributes scope or operational context, with no filler or repetition of the title.

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 zero-argument local read with an output schema, the description supplies the essential chain, assets, result type, and fixed-data behavior. Although explicit sibling alternatives could improve discovery, nothing important is missing for selecting and invoking this simple tool correctly.

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?

There are no parameters, so the empty schema already makes invocation straightforward and establishes the baseline score. The description usefully clarifies that callers cannot select another chain or asset set through this tool: its scope is fixed to Ethereum USDS and sUSDS.

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 and scope: locally returning canonical Ethereum USDS and sUSDS addresses plus wallet-read guidance. The fixed, local deployment-metadata focus distinguishes it from the sibling Sky deposit, redeem, and withdraw preparation tools and from live data lookups.

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?

It gives clear context for choosing the tool when fixed deployment addresses or direct wallet-read guidance are needed, and explicitly rules out using the server as a Sky, RPC, indexer, or third-party API proxy. It does not name an alternative for live protocol state or transaction preparation, so the routing guidance is not fully explicit.

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