agentlens_trust

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It only states the function and gives an example, but fails to disclose the return format, whether it's read-only, any side effects, or error conditions. This is insufficient for a tool with no annotations.

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 very concise, with a clear purpose statement, a 'When to use' section, and a code example. No wasted words, well-structured for an AI agent.

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?

The tool lacks an output schema, so the description should explain the return value. It does not describe what the trust score looks like (e.g., numeric range, confidence level). Also, no error handling info. This leaves the agent guessing about the response format.

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 100%, and the description adds value by explaining the action enum (only 'score') and clarifying that agentId is required for score. The example further illustrates usage, going beyond the schema's bare descriptions.

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 'Get trust scores for agents', which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like agentlens_agents or agentlens_health by focusing on trust scores.

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?

Provides explicit 'When to use' guidance: to check trust before delegating or monitor reputation. Though it doesn't mention when not to use or alternatives, the context is clear and helpful.

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