get_smart_account_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully inform behavior. It discloses the tool is a deterministic resolution and existence check, but omits details like read-only nature, required permissions, side effects, or what the response contains. For a read-like operation, a readOnlyHint would be expected. The description is insufficient.

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 sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the verb 'Resolve'. However, it could be split into two sentences for clarity, and the technical reference 'via the MasterAccountController' may be unnecessary overhead. Still, it is efficient.

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?

The tool has two parameters and no output schema. The description only states the tool 'reports whether the Smart Account exists,' leaving the agent uncertain about the return format (e.g., boolean, address, full object). The lack of detail on resolution output and how to interpret results significantly reduces 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, yet the description adds no explanation for the two required parameters. The schema provides types and patterns, but the description does not clarify what 'xrpl_address' or 'network' represent in the tool's context. The agent must infer meaning from names alone.

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 resolves a Flare address from an XRPL account and reports on-chain existence. The verb 'resolve' and specific resource 'Smart Account' make the purpose distinct. The mention of 'MasterAccountController' adds technical precision. It differentiates from sibling tools like 'get_flr_balance' or 'fassets_system_state'.

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. The description does not specify prerequisites, typical use cases, or scenarios where it should be avoided. The agent receives no help in deciding between this and sibling tools.

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