nayori_agent_context

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

Annotations already mark it safe (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false), and the description adds useful context: the server may act in read-only or signing mode, and this tool only reports that state rather than changing it. It also surfaces marketplace-specific details such as fixed fee and allowlisted contract IDs.

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?

One dense sentence packs the return-value list and the usage hint without redundancy. The purpose is front-loaded, and every phrase carries information relevant to calling the tool.

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 carries the burden of explaining return values, and it enumerates every relevant field plus the network (Stacks mainnet). For a parameterless context tool, an agent has everything needed to call and interpret it.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema leaves nothing undocumented and the description needs no parameter elaboration. The description accurately reflects that no inputs are required.

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 names a specific verb ('Show') and resource (who the server acts as on the Nayori marketplace), then enumerates exactly what is returned: signer address, STX balance, read-only/signing mode, registry agents, fixed fee, and allowlisted contract IDs. This clearly differentiates it from siblings like nayori_apply_to_job or nayori_tx_status, which perform or track operations.

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?

'Call this first' gives explicit placement guidance relative to the other marketplace tools, which is strong context for an agent. It does not spell out when-not-to-use or name alternatives, but for an identity/status tool that is a minor omission.

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