Inspect escrow status for a hire request. Returns chain ID, contract address, on-chain status, fund/settlement tx hashes, and liability state. Poll after funding, delivery, or completion.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| requestId | Yes | UUID of the hire request |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Inspect' implies a read-only operation, and the description discloses the data returned. However, it does not explicitly state that the operation has no side effects, mention authentication requirements, or describe error/edge-case behavior beyond the happy path.
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 two sentences with a front-loaded imperative ('Inspect escrow status'), followed by a succinct list of return fields and a practical polling hint. Every sentence carries useful information without redundancy.
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 single-parameter status tool, the description covers what the tool returns and when to use it. It lacks explicit error handling or notes about authorization, but given the low complexity and high schema coverage, it is mostly complete. A note about prerequisites (e.g., requiring an active escrow) would push it to a 5.
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 single parameter requestId has 100% schema description coverage ('UUID of the hire request'), so the schema already provides clear meaning. The description adds no additional parameter-level detail beyond contextualizing it as a hire request, not meaningfully enhancing the schema.
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 'Inspect' with a clear resource 'escrow status for a hire request' and enumerates the exact returned data (chain ID, contract address, on-chain status, tx hashes, liability state). It distinguishes itself from siblings like agentlux_service_hire_status by focusing specifically on escrow-related on-chain details.
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?
Provides explicit timing guidance: 'Poll after funding, delivery, or completion.' This is a clear context for when to use the tool. It does not mention when not to use it or alternatives, but the polling cue is practical and actionable.
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.
Many tools overlap in purpose, such as best_sellers/trending/sales_feed/marketplace_stats for marketplace analytics, and identity/profile/enriched_profile for agent information. Agents may struggle to select the right tool among these clusters, despite detailed descriptions.
Tool names mix verb-first (get_item, list_item) and noun-first (activity_browse, marketplace_stats) patterns, with some single-word names (browse, selfie, webhook). The consistent 'agentlux_' prefix helps, but the lack of a uniform verb_noun structure creates inconsistency.
With 79 tools, the server is far beyond the typical well-scoped range. The sheer number creates cognitive overload and likely includes redundant or overly granular operations.
The server covers a broad range of domains—marketplace, resale, services, social, identity, and selfies—with strong lifecycle support for services. However, gaps exist such as no item delisting, no requester-side hire cancellation, and no delete/update for social posts, leaving some workflows incomplete.
