xrp_help

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for disclosure. It only states 'Get help and guidance' without explaining output format, whether it requires a topic, or any side effects. This is minimal for a tool that could provide various types of assistance.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasteful content. It is appropriately sized for a simple help tool, though it could add more useful context without compromising conciseness.

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?

The tool is simple with one optional parameter and no output schema, but the description does not explain what kind of help is provided, what topics are covered, or what the response looks like. Given the similarity to sibling tools, more context is needed to fully understand its purpose.

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 100% with the 'topic' parameter already described as 'Help topic or tool name'. The tool description adds no additional parameter detail, so the schema does the heavy lifting. A baseline of 3 is appropriate given the high coverage.

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 uses a specific action ('Get help') and identifies the resource ('XRP MCP tools'), clearly indicating this tool provides assistance. However, it does not differentiate from similar sibling tools like xrp_search_tools or xrp_list_tools_by_category, making its exact scope somewhat generic.

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 use when needing help but provides no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives like xrp_search_tools. It lacks context about whether to provide a topic or how the help content is structured.

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