fluid_get_vault_by_nft

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It implies a read-only operation and adds that the position summary is 'decoded', but it does not disclose potential failure modes, input validity requirements, or whether it queries the blockchain directly. It is not misleading, but it lacks rich behavioral detail.

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, focused sentence with no filler. It front-loads the action and the expected outputs, making it easy to read and process.

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 returns a 'decoded position summary' but the description does not explain what that includes, and there is no output schema to fill the gap. It also does not contextualize the tool among many sibling getters, leaving an agent unsure when to choose this over similar options. The description is minimally sufficient but not complete.

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 describes chain and nft_id; the tool description adds no new meaning for these parameters. The rpc_url parameter is undocumented in both the schema and description. With schema coverage at 67%, the description should compensate but does not.

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 gets the vault address and decoded position summary for a specific vault position NFT ID. It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource, and distinguishes from siblings like fluid_get_vault_data (likely by vault address) and fluid_get_user_vault_nft_ids (which lists NFT IDs).

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites like obtaining the NFT ID via fluid_get_user_vault_nft_ids, nor does it clarify differences from fluid_get_vault_position. The description gives no context about which scenarios favor this tool.

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