Get Sync Status

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

Annotations already mark this as read-only and non-destructive. The description adds that it returns per-chain sync state and last sync time, and clearly states the tool requires no credits, which is useful context beyond the schema/annotations. No contradiction.

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?

Two short sentences deliver purpose and key detail without redundancy. The 'FREE' note is a distinctive benefit and not fluff.

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 partially covers return contents (chains synced, last sync time). Combined with the schema's clear parameter documentation and simple read-only nature, the description is sufficient, though it lacks explicit mention of address count limits (already in schema).

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 covers 100% of the one parameter with a description. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the schema, so baseline applies.

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 checks synchronization status of addresses across all chains, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_portfolio or get_transactions. It also specifies output (sync state and last sync time), making the purpose 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 description implies this is used to check sync status, but does not explicitly specify when to prefer it over siblings like sync_transactions or get_transactions. It provides context (across chains, free) but no exclusion criteria.

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