fetchNftContractDataByMultichainAddress

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

No annotations are provided, and the description lacks any behavioral traits such as whether the operation is read-only, rate limits, or authentication requirements. The agent is left guessing about the tool's side effects or preconditions.

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, clear sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the main action and resource.

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 no output schema, the description should clarify what 'NFT contract data' includes (e.g., metadata, floor price, etc.). The description is vague, leaving the agent uncertain about the return structure. More detail is needed for completeness.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage for both parameters, so the schema already defines the parameters well. The description adds only the context of 'across multiple chains', which is implicit in the schema. No further semantic enrichment beyond 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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves NFT contract data for wallet addresses across multiple chains. It uses specific verb 'Get' and resource 'NFT contract data', and distinguishes from sibling tools like getNFTMetadata (single contract) and fetchNftsOwnedByMultichainAddresses (NFTs owned).

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?

Description does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. However, the context implies it is for contract data rather than NFT ownership, but no explicit when-not or alternative names are provided.

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