VeChain MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It describes the conversion action but lacks details on permissions, rate limits, error handling, or output format. For a tool with no annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding its behavior.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose without unnecessary words. Every part of the sentence contributes to understanding the tool's function, making it appropriately concise and well-structured.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (involving token conversion with 2 parameters), no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on output format, error cases, dependencies, or how it interacts with other tools, leaving the agent with insufficient context for reliable use.

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%, so the description must compensate. It implies 'amount' and 'tokenAddress' parameters by mentioning 'token amount' and 'smallest unit', but doesn't explicitly define them or their formats. The description adds some meaning but doesn't fully document the parameters, resulting in a baseline score.

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 verb 'convert' and the resource 'token amount', specifying the transformation from 'smallest unit (e.g., wei)' to 'human-readable units'. It distinguishes from sibling 'convert_to_base_units' by indicating the opposite direction, though it could be more explicit about the sibling relationship.

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 versus alternatives is provided. The description implies usage for converting token amounts from base units, but it doesn't mention prerequisites, when not to use it, or compare it to other tools like 'convert_to_base_units' or 'get_token_info_by_ticker' for context.

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