erc8004_get_agent

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

Annotations already disclose readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the 'at least one parameter' constraint but does not describe return format or error behavior, which is acceptable given the annotations.

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?

Two concise sentences with no waste, front-loaded with the core action. Every word contributes to understanding the purpose and usage.

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 read-only getter with annotations, the description is adequate. It does not describe the returned agent identity structure, but given the schema coverage and tool simplicity, the missing output details are not a significant gap.

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 covers all three parameters with individual descriptions, but the description adds the critical XOR relationship between agentId and walletAddress, and clarifies that at least one is required—information not present in the schema's optional parameter definitions.

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 'Get ERC-8004 agent identity', a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like erc8004_register_agent and erc8004_update_agent by focusing on retrieval.

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?

It provides clear invocation context by requiring either agentId or walletAddress, with 'provide at least one' as an explicit usage instruction. It does not explicitly list alternatives, but the sibling names make the scope evident.

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