x402_settlement_verdict

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

Annotations declare read-only, non-destructive, open-world. The description adds that it's a signed ruling computed over its own index, forward-only from launch, with rate limits and cost details, providing useful context beyond annotations.

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 front-loaded with purpose, followed by tier details. It is slightly verbose but each sentence adds value, making it appropriately concise for the information conveyed.

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 outlines what each tier returns but not the exact structure or format. For a data-providing tool, this could hinder an agent's ability to parse the response, though the description covers key aspects.

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%, baseline 3. The description adds detail on tier costing, rate limits, token requirement, and window defaults, providing marginal but useful additional meaning 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 clearly states the tool provides a signed ruling on the x402 USDC settlement market on Base, covering momentum, concentration, and leading publisher. It distinguishes itself from the sibling x402_publisher_verdict by focusing on the overall market, though not explicitly contrasting.

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 explains when to use preview vs full tiers based on need for details and cost. However, it does not discuss when to use this tool over siblings or provide explicit 'when-not-to-use' guidance.

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