songbird_fcc_registry

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

No annotations provided, so description must disclose behavioral traits. It implies read-only scanning but does not state idempotency, safety, permissions, rate limits, or error behavior. Minimal disclosure beyond listing outputs.

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?

Single sentence of 30 words, efficient and front-loaded with the main action. No wasted words, but could be more structured for 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?

Description covers main outputs (FCC deployment status, FDC/Relay contracts, full registry) but lacks return format or structure. Without output schema, more detail on what 'reports' looks like would improve 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 coverage is 0% and description provides no extra meaning for the 'network' parameter beyond repeating the default value. Does not explain enum options or when to choose each network.

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?

Verb 'scan' and 'reports' clearly indicate read operation. Specifies resource (FlareContractRegistry) and contract types (PMW, TEE, compute extensions, FDC/Relay). Distinguishes from sibling tools like fassets_* or fdc_* which handle other Flare subsystems.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. Does not mention prerequisites or exclusion criteria. The reference to 'post-STP.13' provides context but not usage boundaries.

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