verify_blockchain

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly and non-destructive behavior. The description adds rich behavioral details: how verification works via composite hash, hash chain, and that it makes the envelope independently verifiable. No contradictions.

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?

Three sentences efficiently convey purpose, return values, and significance. No wasted words; front-loaded with the primary action.

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 one parameter, no output schema, and provided annotations, the description fully covers what an agent needs: purpose, inputs, outputs (returns composite hash, file hash, tx ID, explorer URL), and the value proposition.

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 the single parameter with 100% description. The tool description does not add parameter-specific details beyond the schema, but contextualizes the purpose adequately.

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 verifies a completed envelope's Solana anchor, specifying what it does and what it returns. It is distinct from sibling tools that create, list, or analyze envelopes.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. The description implies use after envelope completion, but lacks alternative tool recommendations or exclusions.

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