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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and discloses key behavioral traits: read-only, free, cached for an hour, and null values for missing records. These details are essential for an agent to understand side effects, cost, caching, and incomplete responses.

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 front-loaded with the core action and resource, then adds essential behavioral details in two tight sentences. Every sentence earns its place by clarifying what is returned or how the tool behaves.

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?

Given the simple one-parameter lookup, 100% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description is complete enough for an agent to call it correctly. It explains the return contents (Priors record and Covenant x402 reputation with tier/score) and handles the edge case of missing records.

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 schema has 100% description coverage for the single 'wallet' parameter, so it already documents the expected '0x wallet address' format. The description does not add syntax or format details beyond the schema, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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 starts with a specific verb and resource: 'Look up an agent wallet's public payment and credit record.' It clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings by describing the exact record types (Priors loans and Covenant x402 reputation) it returns.

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 when to use the tool by naming what it retrieves, but it provides no explicit when/when-not guidance or alternatives. An agent can infer it is for reputation checks, but there is no comparison to sibling tools or stated exclusions.

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