Get one artist-specific collector TDH register by AB5D artist slug. Collector rows are paginated because large Raster-indexed oeuvres can contain thousands of current addresses.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | Yes | AB5D artist slug, e.g. 'casey-reas' | |
| limit | No | ||
| offset | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine behavioral context: collector rows are paginated because large Raster-indexed oeuvres may have thousands of addresses, which prevents an agent from assuming a single full response.
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 sentences with no filler: the first front-loads the core purpose and required input, the second justifies and explains pagination. Every clause earns its place.
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?
The description covers the input key, the singular nature of the tool, and pagination, but with no output schema it leaves the return shape and what a 'collector TDH register' contains unexplained. It also does not clarify how to advance through paginated pages or how to decide between this and list_artist_collector_tdh.
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 slug parameter is already described in the schema, and the description repeats that it is an AB5D artist slug without adding new meaning. Limit and offset have structural metadata (defaults, min, max) but no schema description; the pagination note partially explains their purpose, though it does not clarify how to page through results.
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: 'Get one artist-specific collector TDH register by AB5D artist slug.' The word 'one' distinguishes it from list_artist_collector_tdh, and 'collector TDH' distinguishes it from get_artist_otdh. This is sufficient for an agent to identify the tool's unique role.
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 usage for a single artist's collector TDH via slug, but it never explicitly says when to prefer this over list_artist_collector_tdh or when not to use it. Pagination is mentioned, but no exclusion or alternative-selection guidance is provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.