addresses_getToken

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

Discloses supported chains and common tokens, but does not mention behavior for invalid token symbols, rate limits, or error handling. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden and is minimally adequate.

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?

Very concise, with purpose stated upfront, followed by clear examples and lists. Every sentence adds value, and the structure is easy to scan.

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 lookup tool, the description covers purpose, parameters with examples, supported chains, and common tokens. It does not specify the return format (implied address string) or error cases, but is otherwise 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with descriptions for both parameters. Description adds value with examples and a curated list of supported chains and common tokens, enhancing understanding 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?

Clearly states 'Get a token's contract address on a specific chain' with examples and supported chains. Does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like addresses_findToken, but the purpose is unambiguous.

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?

Implies usage for looking up token addresses by symbol and chain, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs siblings (e.g., addresses_findToken, addresses_listTokens) or when not to use it.

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