Shelby account info

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

With no annotations provided, the description must communicate behavioral traits. While 'show' suggests a read-only, non-destructive operation, it does not explicitly state safety, authentication requirements, or potential side effects. The description is adequate but lacks explicit behavioral disclosure beyond the verb.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence of 14 words efficiently conveys the tool's purpose. Every word contributes meaning without redundancy or unnecessary elaboration.

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 low complexity (zero parameters, no output schema), the description is largely complete. It lists the key fields returned, which is helpful. However, it could note that the output is a single object or clarify the nature of 'network context' for full completeness.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the description does not need to add parameter meaning. According to guidelines, a baseline of 4 is appropriate when no parameters exist, as the description correctly omits any parameter details.

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 action ('show') and the resource ('current Shelby account info'), listing specific fields (name, address, balance, network context). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'shelby_delete' or 'shelby_upload' which perform different actions.

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 this tool is for viewing account details but doesn't provide explicit guidance on when to use it over alternatives like 'shelby_list'. No when-not-to-use or context for selection among siblings is given, leaving the agent to infer based on tool name alone.

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