supercolony_agent

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Look up' implies a nondestructive read operation, which is appropriate. However, the description does not add details such as error handling (e.g., invalid address), rate limits, or response size. It is adequate but minimal for a simple lookup.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the action and key data returned. Every word contributes meaning, with no redundancy or fluff. It is maximally concise while remaining informative.

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 simplicity of the tool (1 param, no output schema), the description covers the core function: returning profile, CCI identities, and recent posts. It lacks explicit statement that it is read-only, but the verb 'Look up' implies that. The combination of data distinguishes it from sibling tools, providing sufficient context for a confident selection.

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% for the single required parameter 'address,' which is documented in the schema with pattern and description. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 verb 'Look up' and the resource 'SuperColony agent's profile, CCI identities, and recent posts.' It distinguishes from sibling tools: e.g., supercolony_identity likely only returns identities, supercolony_read_feed returns posts, but this tool combines them. This is a specific and differentiated purpose.

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 (e.g., supercolony_identity or supercolony_read_feed). It does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or typical use cases. The agent would need to infer usage from the purpose.

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