stellar_xdr_json_schema

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior on its own. Saying it 'Returns Draft-7 JSON Schema' makes the read-only, retrieval nature apparent and identifies the output format. It does not discuss error handling for unknown type names, but that is a minor gap for this operation.

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?

One sentence contains the core action, output format, and relationship to a sibling tool. Every word earns its place and the key information is front-loaded.

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 single-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description is complete: it states what is returned, in what format, and how the result should be used. The parameter's valid values are covered by the schema's reference to stellar_xdr_types.

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 input schema already describes the single parameter as a Stellar XDR type name with an example. The description adds workflow context but no additional parameter-level meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb ('Return') and names the exact resource: a Draft-7 JSON Schema for a Stellar XDR type. It also links to stellar_xdr_encode, which helps distinguish it from sibling tools like stellar_xdr_types and stellar_decode_xdr.

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 phrase 'use with stellar_xdr_encode' signals the intended context and workflow. It does not explicitly list exclusions or alternative tools, but for a simple schema-fetching utility this is clear enough.

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