MolTrust

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

Discloses scoring range (0-100) and input factors analyzed, but omits error handling (invalid addresses), side effects, or rate limiting since no annotations exist to carry this burden.

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?

Well-structured with front-loaded purpose, methodology details, and parameter specification; no redundant content but Args section formatting is slightly informal.

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?

Adequate for a scoring tool with output schema present; explains the composite nature of the score without needing to detail return structure.

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?

Effectively compensates for 0% schema description coverage by specifying address format ('0x...') and chain context (Base/EVM) in the Args section.

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?

Clear specific purpose ('Get an agent trust score') with specific resource (Base wallet) and methodology details (ERC-8004, USDC, etc.) that implicitly distinguish it from sibling credential/verification tools, though explicit differentiation from 'moltguard_detail' or 'mt_get_trust_score' is absent.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance or comparison to alternatives; lacks indication of when to prefer this over 'moltguard_detail' for detailed analysis or other trust scoring tools.

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