Resolve a Nibshare link (https://nibgate.xyz/ns/ or a bare slug) to its machine-readable manifest: title, price, currency, content type, status, expiry, and the page/access/unlock/media URLs. Use before attempting payment or access.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | No | Full share URL, e.g. https://nibgate.xyz/ns/DxqTvRKJ. | |
| slug | No | The Nibshare share slug, e.g. DxqTvRKJ. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It clearly discloses what the tool does and what it returns, listing the manifest fields and URLs. Although it does not explicitly call out read-only behavior, 'resolve' plus 'use before payment' strongly implies a non-mutating lookup.
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, information-dense sentence with no filler. It front-loads the resource being resolved, then lists output fields, and ends with a clear usage instruction.
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 no output schema, the description does well to enumerate the returned manifest fields and provide usage timing. It is slightly incomplete because it does not explicitly state that at least one of url or slug is required, especially since the schema marks zero parameters as required.
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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds useful context about accepted input forms (full URL or bare slug) but does not clarify the relationship or precedence between the two optional parameters, such as whether one must be provided.
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 ('Resolve') with a clear resource (Nibshare link) and enumerates the returned manifest fields. This makes the tool's function obvious and distinguishes it from the sibling tools, which target content exploration, leaderboards, ledger, and platform stats.
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 explicitly states when to use the tool: 'Use before attempting payment or access.' It gives clear context but does not name explicit alternatives or exclusions, so it stops short of a 5.
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.
Each tool targets a distinct concern: content discovery, rankings, ledger activity, platform totals, and Nibshare resolution. There is no meaningful overlap between them, and the descriptions make the boundaries clear.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern: explore_content, get_leaderboards, get_ledger, get_platform_stats, resolve_share. The naming is uniform and predictable.
Five tools is a well-scoped set for a public data/read-only platform server. Each tool serves a clear purpose without redundancy or bloat.
The toolkit covers core read-only needs: finding content, viewing rankings, checking ledger activity, seeing platform totals, and resolving share links. A direct content or creator detail endpoint is missing, but the existing tools cover the main discovery and analytics workflows.