identity__resolve_agent

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

The description implies a read-only lookup but does not explicitly state that it is non-destructive, safe, or what the output contains. With no annotations, the agent lacks clarity on whether it requires authentication, has side effects, or what 'full public registration' entails.

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 concise with one functional sentence and a brief context prefix. No redundant words, but it could benefit from slightly more detail without becoming verbose.

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 lookup tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential purpose but omits details on behavior like error handling, pagination, or what happens if the identity is not found. It is minimally viable.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage for two parameters, and the description only mentions that resolution is 'by agent_id or DID' without explaining formats, precedence if both are provided, or constraints. The agent must infer usage from parameter 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 an identity to its full public registration using either agent_id or DID. The bracketed prefix adds context about identity and capability discovery. It distinguishes from sibling tools like identity__describe_agent by focusing on resolution from a registry.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as identity__describe_agent or erc8004__resolve_agent. The description does not mention prerequisites, when not to use, or trade-offs between parameters.

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