Das Get Assets By Collection

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds 'operation class read' and 'read-only', which reinforce but do not significantly extend beyond annotations. No behavioral contradictions or new insights like pagination behavior or error handling are provided.

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 that directly state purpose and usage advice. It is front-loaded with the core action and avoids unnecessary details.

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 simple parameter set (page, limit, collectionAddress) and the presence of an output schema and annotations, the description provides adequate context. It covers the basic use case and advises on when to prefer DAS reads over Metaplex writes. Minor gaps in error scenarios or edge cases are acceptable for a tool of this complexity.

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 has 100% coverage, so the description adds little to parameter semantics. The description does not explain the purpose of page and limit beyond what the schema provides, nor does it clarify that collectionAddress is the NFT mint address (already in schema). Baseline 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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'all NFTs in a collection via DAS', which is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools like das_getAsset (single asset), das_getAssetsByOwner, and das_getAssetsByCreator. The mention of 'collection' aligns with the tool name and parameter.

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 advises using DAS reads before Metaplex writes for validation, which suggests a when-to-use scenario. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or compare it directly with other DAS read tools like das_searchAssets, leaving some ambiguity about selection criteria.

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