get_receipt

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses that raw prompt/response are never stored and no wallet needed, but lacks details on rate limits, data retention, or authorization (beyond no wallet).

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?

Two sentences, highly concise, with key info front-loaded: 'FREE' and purpose. No wasted words.

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?

Tool has one simple parameter and no output schema. Description fully explains the receipt contents and a notable behavioral constraint (raw data not stored). Complete for a retrieval tool.

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%, so baseline 3. Description adds no extra meaning to the 'attestation_id' parameter beyond its type and format hint in 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 fetches a public receipt for an attestation, listing specific contents (content hash, model, timestamps, signature, proof). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like notarize_*, verify_attestation.

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 includes 'FREE' and 'No wallet needed,' indicating when to use this tool without prerequisites. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like verify_attestation or notarize tools.

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