toreador_generate_qr

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 states the tool returns a QR data URI and payment URI, and that it is free, implying no state changes. However, it does not explicitly confirm non-destructiveness or describe side effects, but the context suggests a read-only operation.

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 concise with two sentences. The first sentence clearly defines the tool's purpose and output, and the second provides additional context (free usage and alternative). No unnecessary information, well front-loaded.

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 tool's moderate complexity, full schema coverage, and no output schema, the description sufficiently covers what the tool does, its inputs, and when to use it. It mentions the output structure (QR data URI and payment URI) and distinguishes sibling tools. No gaps are apparent.

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 covers all 4 parameters with detailed descriptions (100% coverage). The description does not add significant meaning beyond what the schema already provides, such as the list of tokens and the requirement for decimal string amounts. Thus, baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 generates a crypto QR code for specific native tokens and Solana SPL tokens, and specifies what it returns (QR data URI and payment URI). It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool toreador_create_session by noting that for ERC-20 stablecoins, that other tool should be used.

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 explicitly tells when to use this tool (for native tokens and Solana SPL tokens) and when to use the alternative toreador_create_session (for ERC-20 stablecoins). It also mentions that no API key is needed, providing clear usage context.

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