get_blockThe deed for a claimed block (owner, message, link, pixels), or availability plus the exact x402 terms for an unclaimed one. Free.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| coord | Yes | Block coordinate "col,row", col 0-159, row 0-89 |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly communicates the conditional behavior for claimed versus unclaimed blocks and states that the operation is free. It does not mention error handling, authentication, or explicitly confirm read-only semantics, but the core behavior is well covered.
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 compact and efficient: two sentences, no filler, with the primary output behavior front-loaded and 'Free' delivered as a crisp standalone signal. Every word 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?
For a single-parameter inspection tool with no output schema, the description covers the main expected results for both states of a block. It could add error behavior or explain how to use the returned x402 terms, but as a basic read-style tool it is largely complete.
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 schema already fully documents the single coord parameter with pattern and range, and the description adds no additional parameter-specific meaning. Since schema coverage is 100%, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.
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 what get_block returns for both claimed and unclaimed blocks, including owner, message, link, pixels, and x402 terms. It is distinct from sibling tools because it targets a single block, though it does not explicitly name a sibling alternative or use a direct verb like 'returns'.
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 the tool is for inspecting one block and notes it is free, but it does not explain when to prefer get_block over list_unclaimed, buy_block, or get_wall. Usage context is inferable from the name and sibling set, but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided.
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 maps to a distinct action/resource: buying, reading a block, reading registry, wall overview, listing unclaimed blocks, and updating owned pixels. Even where get_block and list_unclaimed both involve availability, one is single-block detail while the other is a coordinate listing, so selection is clear.
All tools use a consistent verb_noun snake_case convention (buy_block, get_block, get_wall, list_unclaimed, set_pixels). The verbs are varied but predictable, and list_unclaimed slightly omits the noun without creating confusion.
Six tools cover the wall's core workflows without redundancy or bloat. Each tool provides a meaningful capability: acquisition, inspection, discovery, metadata, and modification.
The surface covers the main lifecycle: view wall, list unclaimed blocks, buy/claim, read deeds, and update pixels/message/link. Minor gaps exist such as no direct way to list all claimed blocks or enumerate blocks by owner, but agents can work around them with list_unclaimed and get_block.