Read token metadata

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the description's job is smaller; 'Public' adds that no auth is needed and 'saved' implies only previously persisted metadata is returned, not an on-chain lookup. It says nothing about what happens when no metadata exists for the token, which is the main behavioral unknown.

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 with no filler, but it is under-specified rather than genuinely tight — the brevity costs parameter and behavior detail that a few more words could have supplied.

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?

With no output schema, the description should say what metadata is returned (name, symbol, decimals, logo?) and what a miss looks like. For a two-required-parameter lookup tool it leaves the agent guessing about both the return shape and the missing-token case.

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 only 50%: chainId carries an inline chain-ID mapping, but token has only a regex pattern and no explanation of what address it expects. The description mentions neither parameter, so it adds no semantics beyond the schema and leaves the gap unfilled.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Public read of a token's saved metadata'), which clearly separates it from the mutating siblings save_metadata, lock_metadata, and prepare_metadata_message. It doesn't explicitly name those siblings, but the read/write split is unambiguous.

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 word 'Public' hints that no authentication is required, but there is no statement of when to call this versus save_metadata or prepare_metadata_message, and no prerequisites or failure conditions. The agent must infer routing from the tool name alone.

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