address_info

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

No annotations provided. The description lists output fields but does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, any side effects, authentication needs, rate limits, or error conditions. The agent gets minimal behavioral context.

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 sentence, efficient and front-loaded with the tool's purpose. It lists key outputs concisely without unnecessary words.

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?

Given the lack of output schema and annotations, the description should provide more detail about the return format, how to interpret results, and any limitations. The current description is too brief for an agent to fully understand the tool's capabilities.

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 has one required parameter 'address' with 0% description coverage. The tool description adds no additional meaning, format, or example for this parameter, leaving the agent to infer from the name alone.

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 an 'Explorer summary for an address' and lists specific data fields (balance, contract status, verification, transaction count). This distinguishes it from more specific sibling tools like get_balance or is_contract, though not 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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs siblings. The description implies it's a broad summary, but does not mention when not to use it or suggest alternatives for specific queries.

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