Diagnose an Evernode host (live)

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

The description adds significant behavioral context beyond annotations: data source (OnLedger), honesty policy (unknown fields omitted, not invented), and error handling ('note on not-found / fetch failure'). Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and description aligns with these without contradiction.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, and every sentence adds value. No wasted 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 presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers all needed context: purpose, data source, parameters, behavioral traits. It is complete for an agent to correctly select and invoke the tool.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds usage context: 'optional: diagnose this supplied host object instead of fetching live' and clarifies the address parameter's role. This adds value beyond the schema.

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's purpose: 'Health view of a single Evernode host by r-address' and lists specific aspects it covers (registration status, reputation, slots, lease terms, red-flags). It distinguishes itself from siblings, which are unrelated (templates, contracts, etc.).

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 explains how to use the tool: fetch live from OnLedger or pass a host object. It also sets expectations with 'REAL data only' and handling of not-found/fetch failure. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives among siblings, though siblings are clearly different.

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