xahau_server_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states 'Read-only', disclosing the tool does not modify state, but does not mention authentication, rate limits, or error handling. Minimal transparency for a simple tool.

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 extremely concise, consisting of one sentence that front-loads key information. Every word contributes to the purpose. It could be structured more, but it earns its place with no wasted text.

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 low complexity (one parameter, no output schema, no nested objects), the description adequately covers purpose, scope, and read-only nature. It does not detail exact return format or examples, but it is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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?

Only one parameter 'network' with enum and default. Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description reiterates 'mainnet or testnet', matching the schema. No additional semantic detail is added beyond what the enum values provide. Baseline 3 is appropriate given low coverage but adequate compensation.

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 health, version, amendments, and ledger range of a Xahua node. It specifies the network parameter (mainnet/testnet) and explicitly labels it 'Read-only', distinguishing it from sibling tools that manipulate state or target different resources.

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 implies usage for obtaining node-level information but does not explicitly specify when to use this tool over alternatives or provide exclusions. Among many sibling tools, context suggests it is for server diagnostics, but guidance is missing.

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