get_delegated_resource_index

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint). The description adds the directional scope of the index but does not disclose return format, pagination, or other behaviors. With annotations present, this is adequate but not especially rich.

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 a single, well-structured sentence with no filler. It front-loads the verb and resource and earns every word.

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 query with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential semantics. It could be improved by noting how this tool differs from the similarly named get_delegated_resource_account_index_v2, but the annotations and schema fill most remaining 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 description coverage is 100% for both parameters (address and network). The description does not add any parameter-level detail beyond what is in the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'Query' and the resource 'resource delegation index', and explicitly defines what the index contains: incoming and outgoing delegations. This makes the tool's purpose immediately obvious and distinguishes it from related getter tools in the sibling set.

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 indicates the tool is used for an account, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_delegated_resource or get_delegated_resource_account_index_v2. The usage context is implied rather than stated.

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