get_escrow_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description itself must convey safety and side effects. 'Get' implies a read-only operation, but it doesn't explicitly state non-mutating behavior or disclose any potential side effects, auth requirements, or response format. It adds value by listing the specific fields returned.

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?

A single sentence with no filler. The purpose is front-loaded and the list of returned values is compact yet informative.

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 info tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers what data is returned and the intended use. It doesn't elaborate on network specifics or address formats, but such details are not essential for basic usage.

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 takes zero parameters, so the schema is fully described by the empty object. The description adds meaning by enumerating what information is returned, which is helpful given no output 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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'Escrow contract info', followed by specific data points (fee, deals created, treasury address, contract address). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_deal or get_buyer_deals, which focus on individual deals or user-specific views.

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?

It explicitly says 'Use to verify the contract is live', giving a clear context. While it doesn't mention alternatives or exclusions, the use case is specific enough to infer when this tool is appropriate.

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