getNFTsForContract

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries full responsibility. It states 'Get all NFTs' but does not disclose that pagination parameters ('startToken', 'limit') imply not all may be returned in one call. No mention of read-only nature, rate limits, or required authentication.

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, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the core purpose. No unnecessary words.

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 tool with 6 parameters and no output schema, the description is too brief. It omits details about pagination behavior, default limit, network dependency, and return format. A more complete description would help an agent use the tool effectively.

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 input schema already documents all parameters well. The description adds only the context of 'contract or collection', which is already obvious from parameter names. No additional meaning beyond 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 tool retrieves all NFTs for a specific contract or collection, matching the name 'getNFTsForContract'. It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('NFTs in a specific contract or collection'), and implicitly distinguishes from siblings like 'getNFTsForOwner' or 'getNFTMetadata'.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'getNFTsForCollection' or 'getNFTsForOwner'. No prerequisites, exclusions, or context-specific recommendations are provided.

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