radiant_get_token_utxos

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It lists the return fields (tokenRef, txid, vout, height, satoshi value), which is helpful. However, it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or mention error handling, pagination, or edge cases. The verb 'Discover' implies read-only, but it is not explicit.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and includes the return fields and a clear usage workflow. No wasted words.

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?

For a simple query tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is complete: it states what is returned and how to use the result. It also connects to sibling tools, making the workflow clear. Nothing essential is missing.

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 schema has one parameter (address) with a clear description. The tool description does not add additional detail about address format, validation, or constraints. Since schema coverage is 100%, the baseline is 3, and the description adds little beyond the schema.

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 states a specific verb ('Discover all Glyph tokens held by an address') and clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like radiant_get_balance or radiant_get_utxos by focusing on token UTXOs. The resource and scope are precise.

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?

It explicitly says when to use the tool ('without prior knowledge of token references') and what to do next (pass tokenRef to radiant_transfer_token or radiant_burn_token). This gives clear guidance and implies it is the discovery entry point for token operations.

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