kaspa_utxos

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

Discloses cost (~$0.0003 in KAS) but no other behavioral traits. No annotations provided, so description bears full burden; missing idempotency, side effects, auth requirements, or error behavior.

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?

Two concise sentences covering purpose and cost. No redundant information, front-loaded with key action.

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?

Covers main output (UTXO set with scriptPublicKey and covenant_id) and cost, but lacks details on error handling, output format, or pagination. Adequate for a simple tool but has gaps.

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?

Single parameter 'address' is described as a Kaspa mainnet address, adding context beyond the schema. However, no format or validation details provided; schema coverage is 0%.

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?

Clearly states it returns the UTXO set for a Kaspa mainnet address, distinguishing it from siblings like kaspa_balance and kaspa_tx_status. However, lacks a strong action verb like 'Retrieves'.

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives (e.g., kaspa_balance for balance only, kaspa_tx_status for transaction status). Only notes it is paid, which is not usage guidance.

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