rustchain_miners

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It effectively describes the tool's behavior by detailing the returned data (wallet address, hardware type, etc.) and the logic behind antiquity multipliers, though it lacks information on rate limits, permissions, or error handling.

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 the core purpose in the first sentence, followed by specific details in a structured manner. Every sentence adds value, such as listing return fields and explaining multiplier logic, with no wasted words or redundancy.

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 tool's complexity (no input parameters but detailed output) and the presence of an output schema, the description is largely complete. It explains the return values and multiplier system well, though it could benefit from mentioning any limitations or dependencies, such as data freshness or network requirements.

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?

Since there are 0 parameters and schema description coverage is 100%, the baseline is 4. The description does not need to add parameter details, and it appropriately focuses on output semantics, such as explaining hardware types and multiplier calculations.

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's purpose with a specific verb ('List') and resource ('all active RustChain miners with hardware details'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like rustchain_balance or rustchain_stats. It explicitly defines the scope and output content, making its function 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 usage by specifying what data is returned (e.g., hardware details, multipliers), but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like rustchain_stats or rustchain_health. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned, leaving some ambiguity in context.

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