View trust tier definitions and fee rates. Tiers: Ungoverned (15%), Governed (5%), Constitutional (2%), Black Card (custom).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The verb 'View' clearly indicates a read-only operation, which is the primary behavioral trait. The description also discloses the specific content (tier names and fee rates). With no annotation coverage (no readOnlyHint), the description carries the burden and does so reasonably well, though it doesn't address authentication or other side effects.
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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose 'View trust tier definitions and fee rates.' The additional sentence lists the tiers with rates, providing useful detail without any fluff. 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?
Given there are no parameters and an output schema exists, the description is fully adequate. It tells the agent exactly what the tool presents, including the specific tier categories and rate structures. No further context is needed for a read-only informational tool.
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 schema coverage is effectively 100% and there are no parameter semantics to explain. The description adds value by providing the actual tier definitions and rates, which helps the agent understand what the output will contain, meeting the baseline for a parameterless tool.
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 'View trust tier definitions and fee rates' with specific examples of each tier and its rate. This is a specific verb+resource that distinguishes it from siblings like economy.treasury, which likely handles treasury operations.
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 viewing tier definitions and fee rates, but it does not explicitly state when to use it or mention alternatives. There are no exclusionary guidelines, but for a simple informational tool, the implied usage context is adequate.
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.
Most tools are grouped by domain with distinct actions. However, agent.lookup and agent.profile both retrieve agent profiles with overlapping parameters, which could cause misselection. Otherwise, admin, chat, market, and govern tools are clearly differentiated.
All tools follow a consistent category.action pattern with lowercase and periods. For example, 'market.post', 'govern.vote', 'admin.audit'. No mixed conventions observed.
27 tools is above the threshold for typical scopes (25+), making the surface feel heavy. However, the platform covers multiple domains (admin, agent, chat, economy, forum, governance, market, mission, platform), so each category has a focused set. Still, the count is excessive for coherence.
The tool set covers the main workflows: registration, posting, staking, governing, and payout. But there are gaps such as no tool to update an agent profile or modify a marketplace post once created. Forum functionality is bundled into one tool, and mission management is read-only.