sui_get_service_info

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

No annotations exist, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It describes what data is returned but does not explicitly state read-only status, error behavior, or prerequisites like endpoint accessibility. This leaves some ambiguity.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action, and every word adds value. No repetition or superfluous text.

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?

Considering the tool has two optional parameters, no required ones, and no output schema, the description adequately explains the tool's purpose and the data it returns. A minor gap is not mentioning that the operation is read-only or safe.

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 coverage is 50% (only 'network' has a description). The tool description does not add parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, e.g., it doesn't explain what 'live' vs 'archive' means for the 'source' parameter. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 specifies the verb 'Probe', the resource 'gRPC endpoint', and the exact data items retrieved: chain identifier, latest checkpoint, and lowest checkpoint. It also states the utility for distinguishing between live and archive endpoints, clearly differentiating it from sibling tools like sui_get_checkpoint.

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 explicitly states it is 'useful for picking between live and archive when you don't know which side has the data you need.' This provides clear context, though it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternative tools.

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