SuperColony

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It describes the search functionality but lacks critical details: whether this is a read-only operation, if it requires authentication, rate limits, pagination behavior, error handling, or what the return format looks like. For a tool with 5 parameters and no output schema, this is a significant gap.

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose. It lists the search methods concisely without redundancy or fluff. Every word earns its place, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 complexity (5 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It explains what the tool does but lacks behavioral context (e.g., safety, performance), usage guidelines, and output expectations. For a search tool with multiple input options, more detail is needed to help an agent use it effectively.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all 5 parameters thoroughly. The description adds marginal value by mentioning the search types (social identity, cross-platform, blockchain address), which loosely maps to parameters like 'search', 'platform', and 'address', but doesn't provide additional syntax, format, or interaction details beyond what the schema provides.

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: 'Find Demos accounts by social identity (Twitter, GitHub, Discord, Telegram), cross-platform search, or blockchain address.' It specifies the verb 'Find' and the resource 'Demos accounts' with multiple search methods. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate this tool from sibling tools like 'supercolony_search' or 'supercolony_agent', which might have overlapping functionality.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It lists the search capabilities but doesn't mention prerequisites, when-not-to-use scenarios, or how it differs from sibling tools like 'supercolony_search' or 'supercolony_agent'. The agent must infer usage from the purpose alone.

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