Show the active safety policy

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool 'returns' data, clearly indicating a read-only operation. However, it does not explicitly confirm idempotency or lack of side effects, though the verb 'get' and title 'Show' imply safety.

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 sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose. It could be slightly improved with bullet points for readability, but it is appropriately sized and 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 simple read-only tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool returns. It does not explain the output format or further context, but it is sufficient given the tool's simplicity.

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 tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to add parameter information, and it does not add any beyond the 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 returns the cluster and guardrails enforced by the server, listing specific items: per-transfer cap, recipient allowlist, and mainnet permission. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_account, get_balance, and prepare_transfer.

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 implies the tool is for retrieving policy information, and among the siblings, only this tool provides such data. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or any prerequisites.

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