get_aipou_contract

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

No annotations are provided, so the description alone must convey behavior. It indicates a read operation returning static configuration data, with no mention of side effects, authentication, or rate limits. For a simple info tool, this is sufficient.

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?

Single sentence, no wasted words. Front-loads the key return values. Every element is necessary and no redundancy.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description lists four concrete items: contract address, Base network details, explorer URL, and minimal ABI. This is sufficiently complete for understanding the tool's return value.

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?

There are no parameters. The input schema has 100% coverage (vacuously). The description adds all meaning about what the tool returns, compensating fully for the lack of parameters.

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 returns the configured AIPOU token contract address, Base network details, explorer URL, and minimal ABI. The verb 'Return' and specific resources distinguish it from siblings like get_aipou_identity or get_aipou_status.

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 gives clear context for what the tool does but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives. Sibling names imply different functionality, but no direct guidance is provided.

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