List Directory entries

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It explains filter mechanics and the tag vocabulary but never states the operation is read-only/idempotent, nor describes pagination behavior, error cases, or result shape for what is a paged listing tool with a cursor parameter.

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?

Three sentences, purpose front-loaded, with filters and use cases packed in without filler. The long tag enumeration is dense but each item is actionable filtering vocabulary.

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 six-parameter, fully described, non-destructive listing tool with no output schema, this covers what an agent needs to select and invoke it. The main remaining gap is that it doesn't hint at what a Directory entry contains beyond name/domain/address and tags.

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%, so the baseline is 3, but the description earns extra by enumerating the full tag vocabulary (exchange, anchor, issuer, wallet, custodian, malicious, unsafe, personal, sdf, memo-required, airdrop, defi) where the schema only offers three examples. It also clarifies that search spans name/domain/address, adding meaning beyond the schema's terser wording.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: search the StellarExpert curated Directory of well-known accounts. It clearly reads as a list/search tool versus the singular get_directory_entry sibling, though it never names siblings explicitly.

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?

Gives concrete use cases (reverse lookups, scam checks via malicious/unsafe tags, labeling counterparties), which is more than most. It stops short of explicit exclusions or naming get_directory_entry/list_directory_tags as alternatives when you already have an address or just want the tag vocabulary.

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