NOVAI signals at a block height

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behaviors. However, it does not mention read-only nature, rate limits, pagination, or any side effects. It only describes output content, missing behavioral traits that an agent needs to safely invoke the tool.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, and every sentence provides useful information. No wasted words.

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 simple tool with one parameter, the description adequately states the output fields. However, without an output schema, it could have included more detail on return structure or limits. It is mostly complete but misses no critical gaps.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, and the schema already describes 'height' as 'Block height to query.' The description repeats this without adding new format or usage details, so it adds marginal value beyond the schema.

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 'List' and resource 'signal commitments recorded at a specific block height', and explains the fields returned. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like novai_get_signals_by_issuer and novai_get_signals_by_type by focusing on block height filtering.

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 states 'Use this to see which signals were committed in a given block', providing clear usage context. It implicitly steers toward siblings for other filters, but lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative names.

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