Get 8DX Local Signer Status

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility. It discloses the read-only nature via 'Shows' and provides valuable context about the default state and configuration requirement. No contradictions or hidden behaviors.

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. Every sentence adds value, with no redundant or filler content.

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 zero-param status endpoint, the description is complete. It states exactly what is shown and the key behavioral context (default disabled, env config required). The return format is inferable from the 'Shows whether' phrasing, so no further detail is necessary.

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 the schema is fully covered. Per guidelines, a 0-param tool gets a baseline of 4; the description doesn't need to add parameter details and doesn't omit any relevant info.

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 'Shows whether the opt-in local signer is enabled', using a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling signing tools like 'eightdx_local_sign_and_send_transaction' by focusing on a read-only status check.

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 provides clear context by explaining that local signing is opt-in, disabled by default, and requires explicit environment configuration. This implies when the tool is useful (to verify if local signer is available), though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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