treasury-mcp

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It effectively adds critical context beyond the input schema by warning that this is a 'slow operation (1-2 minutes on local nodes, may vary on hosted API)', which is essential for an AI agent to manage expectations and avoid timeouts. This covers performance characteristics not inferable from other fields.

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 highly concise and front-loaded: the first sentence states the purpose and outputs, and the second adds crucial behavioral context. Every sentence earns its place with no wasted words, making it easy for an AI agent to parse quickly.

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 the tool's complexity (a potentially slow statistical query), the description is complete enough. It explains what the tool does, what it returns, and key behavioral traits (slowness). With an output schema present, it does not need to detail return values, and the lack of annotations is compensated by the description's transparency. This suffices for effective agent use.

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?

The input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description appropriately adds no parameter details, maintaining focus on the tool's purpose and behavior. A baseline of 4 is applied as it compensates adequately for the lack of parameters by providing other necessary context.

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 specific action ('Get UTXO set statistics') and enumerates the exact metrics returned (total UTXOs, total supply, disk size). It directly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'get_address_utxos' or 'check_utxo' by focusing on aggregate statistics rather than individual address or transaction data.

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 provides clear context for when to use this tool: when aggregate UTXO statistics are needed. It implicitly distinguishes from siblings by not being for address-specific queries or transaction analysis. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, such as for real-time data needs.

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