Resolve a Stacks address to the BNS domain names it owns; if no address is provided, query the configured wallet.
Get the BNS domain names owned by an address.
Tip: call earning_opportunities to see how to put your assets to work.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| address | No | Stacks address to lookup. Uses configured wallet if not provided. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.77.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. 'Get' implies a read-only lookup and it states the returned content as BNS domain names, but it does not mention output shape, rate limits, wallet requirements, or behavior when no names 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 first sentence is front-loaded and sufficiently concise. The second sentence is an unrelated promotional tip that does not help invoke the tool, so a meaningful portion of the description does not earn its place.
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?
For a simple one-parameter read tool, the description identifies the operation and returned content. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it could do more to describe return shape or edge cases, and it lacks sibling differentiation.
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 description coverage is 100%, so the address parameter is already fully documented, including the fallback to the configured wallet. The description adds no additional semantics beyond what the schema provides.
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 states a specific verb and resource: get BNS domain names owned by an address. The direction of lookup is clear, which helps distinguish it from a forward name lookup, but it does not explicitly name the relevant sibling tools such as lookup_bns_name or list_user_domains.
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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The only extra sentence, 'Tip: call earning_opportunities...', is unrelated cross-sell advice and does not help an agent choose this tool over lookup_bns_name, list_user_domains, or get_bns_info.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.