get_niulai_infoReturn publisher-declared Base network, contract, claim, community-role, custody, and risk-boundary information for 牛来 (NIULAI).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| roles | Yes | ||
| schema | Yes | ||
| symbol | Yes | ||
| network | Yes | ||
| contracts | Yes | ||
| exclusions | Yes | ||
| provenance | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already communicate read-only, idempotent, open-world, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful context beyond annotations by specifying that the returned data is publisher-declared and scoped to particular information categories, which clarifies the data's nature and boundaries.
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 front-loaded sentence that states the action first and then lists the content categories. It contains no filler, repetition, or extraneous detail.
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 tool has no parameters, rich annotations, and an output schema, the description is complete for an agent to call it correctly. The output schema covers return structure, and the description covers the semantic scope.
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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema fully documents the parameter surface. The description compensates by making the fixed scope explicit, which is the only semantic information an agent needs.
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 ('Return') and names a particular resource (NIULAI community asset information), then enumerates the covered domains: Base network, contract, claim, community-role, custody, and risk-boundary. This level of specificity clearly separates it from siblings such as get_growth_metrics and search_agents.
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: whenever an agent needs publisher-declared NIULAI asset information. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative tools, so the guidance is implied rather than explicit.
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 clearly distinct area: query compilation, growth metrics, entity-specific information, and agent registry search. There is no meaningful overlap or ambiguity between them.
All tool names follow the same snake_case verb_noun pattern: compile_query_plan, get_growth_metrics, get_niulai_info, search_agents. The naming is predictable and internally consistent.
Four tools is a focused, manageable set for a read-only public-data information server. Each tool has a distinct role and none feel redundant or missing from the core scope.
The set covers the main read-only capabilities: query plan compilation, metrics retrieval, publisher/entity details, and agent discovery. Minor gaps exist, such as no query execution or full agent detail endpoint, but these appear intentionally outside the stated scope.