nft_check_ownership

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

No annotations provided, so the description should disclose behavioral traits. It mentions return type (ownership status and matching NFTs) but omits details like read-only nature, pagination, rate limits, or side effects.

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 two concise sentences front-loading the purpose, then listing parameters. No wasted words, though additional structure could enhance readability.

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 read tool with 5 params and full schema coverage, the description is adequate. It lacks output schema details and sibling differentiation, but overall covers the essential context.

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%, and the description adds no new parameter meaning beyond summarizing required/optional. The description is helpful but not necessary 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 verifies ownership of NFTs (ERC-721 and ERC-1155) within a collection. It lists required and optional parameters, and the scope is implicit but distinct from sibling nft_check_ownership_token_id.

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 implies usage for checking collection-level ownership but does not explicitly differentiate from alternatives like nft_check_ownership_token_id or nft_for_address. No when-not or prerequisites are stated.

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