Retrieves SIP-016 NFT metadata for a specific token by contract ID and token ID, helping you inspect collection details before using or trading an asset.
Get metadata for a specific NFT (SIP-016).
Tip: call earning_opportunities to see how to put your assets to work.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| tokenId | Yes | Token ID of the NFT | |
| contractId | Yes | NFT collection contract ID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.77.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, meaning the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It contains zero operational details regarding authentication, rate limits, error types, or the nature of the operation (e.g., Read-Only).
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 brief and front-loads the primary function immediately. The inclusion of a tip is slightly distracting from the function's core description, preventing a perfect score, but it remains concise.
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 retrieves data (metadata) but provides no description of the expected return structure, making it incomplete for an agent trying to predict the output. Without output schema or behavioral annotations, the description is insufficient for a fully autonomous call.
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?
Since schema description coverage is 100%, the baseline score of 3 is applied. The description does not add any semantic meaning or constraints regarding the format or expected values of the 'contractId' or 'tokenId' beyond what is already defined in 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 purpose: 'Get metadata for a specific NFT'. Including '(SIP-016)' provides a useful technical context by referencing a specific standard, which helps an agent distinguish this function from generic NFT metadata calls.
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 tool offers very little guidance on when to use it relative to alternatives. It provides a 'Tip' directing the user to another tool, which is a suggestion for the next step rather than a usage guideline for the current function's context or prerequisites.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.