check_contract_safety

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates a read-only API call ('analysis' via GoPlus), but does not mention whether the tool modifies state, requires authentication, or has rate limits. The description is not misleading, but could add context like 'This is a read-only query'.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the key action and resource. Every word contributes meaning: 'Analyze', 'smart contract', 'verification status, proxy patterns, and known risk items', and 'using the GoPlus Security API'. 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?

For a read-only analysis tool with no output schema, the description adequately states what it does but does not describe the return format or what the analysis results contain (e.g., risk levels, detailed reports). Given the complexity and lack of output schema, it is marginally complete.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, meaning all three parameters (contract_address, chain_id, network) are documented in the schema itself. The tool description adds no additional semantic detail beyond referencing the GoPlus API, so it meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 'Analyze' and the resource 'smart contract', specifying three distinct aspects: verification status, proxy patterns, and known risk items. It also mentions using the GoPlus Security API, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like check_token_safety and check_wallet_safety.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., check_token_safety or check_wallet_safety). No explicit context about appropriate use cases or prerequisites is given, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool's purpose alone.

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