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

Although no annotations are provided, the description discloses key behavioral traits: it calls a premium endpoint costing $0.25 USDC via x402, and returns a URL and instructions. This gives the agent a clear picture of the tool's cost and non-destructive nature.

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, well-structured sentence that immediately conveys the core purpose and key details (cost, endpoint, use case). No extraneous information is present.

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 only one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately covers its function and context. It explains the purpose and cost, but does not describe the response format or potential error conditions, which would add completeness.

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 sole parameter 'address' has no description in the schema (0% coverage). The description adds that it is a wallet address for due-diligence, but does not specify format, network, or validation rules. This provides minimal additional meaning beyond the parameter name.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: getting a URL and instructions for a premium audit endpoint. The verb 'Get' and resource 'URL + instructions' are specific, and the context of 'full due-diligence on a wallet before paying it onchain' distinguishes it from sibling tools.

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 ('before paying it onchain'), providing clear usage context. However, it does not mention when not to use it or list alternative tools for similar tasks, such as mainstreet_vet or mainstreet_preflight.

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