get_user_stakes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It says 'Get' but does not explicitly state it is read-only or disclose any limitations. The term 'stakes' in the tool name conflicts with 'all StarGate NFTs owned' in the description, creating ambiguity about whether it returns only staked NFTs or all owned NFTs. This lack of clarity undermines transparency.

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, directly front-loaded with the action and resource. It contains no wasted words and is easy to parse.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain what 'detailed information' includes and clarify the relationship between 'stakes' and 'owned'. The ambiguity about scope (staked vs. all owned) makes the description incomplete for an agent to predict the tool's response.

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?

The schema already documents the single parameter 'address' with a description. The tool description adds valuable context that the stakes refer to StarGate NFTs, clarifying what the address parameter is for beyond the generic schema description.

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 action ('Get') and the resource ('all StarGate NFTs owned by an address'), with an added qualifier ('with detailed information'). It distinguishes from generic NFT listing tools by specifically naming StarGate NFTs.

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?

Usage is implied: this tool is for fetching StarGate NFTs for a given address. However, it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this over alternatives like get_ids_owned_by or nft_get_owned_tokens, nor does it provide any exclusions.

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