get_trust_badge

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully covers behavioral aspects: it is a read-only network call, no authentication required, no side effects, and the badge auto-updates without manual refresh. No contradictions with annotations since none exist.

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 concise, front-loaded with the main action, and each sentence provides essential information: purpose, return structure, auto-update behavior, read-only nature, and usage context. No unnecessary words.

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 tool's simplicity (single parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers all key aspects: what it returns, how it behaves, and when to use it. It could be more complete by mentioning error cases, but the provided information is sufficient for correct invocation.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, with the parameter entity_id already documented with context (UUID, source from lookup_identity or verify_trust). The description adds extra context about the return format but does not significantly enhance parameter understanding beyond the schema.

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 retrieves an embeddable trust badge URL for an AgentGraph entity, specifying the return fields (badge_url, markdown, html). It distinguishes from siblings by noting it generates a visual indicator, to be used after verify_trust or lookup_identity.

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 'Use after verify_trust or lookup_identity to generate a visual trust indicator', providing clear guidance on when to invoke this tool relative to other tools. It also notes it is read-only and requires no authentication.

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