get_deployer_tokens

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

The description indicates a read operation via 'Get', but lacks details such as no side effects, rate limits, or pagination behavior. With no annotations provided, the description adequately conveys basic behavior but could be more explicit.

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, clear sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose. It is concise with no unnecessary words.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is nearly complete. It specifies the input and the result (token deployment IDs), though it could mention the output format (e.g., list) or edge cases like empty results.

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% with parameter 'deployer' described as 'Deployer wallet address'. The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema, achieving baseline adequacy.

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 action 'Get' and the resource 'all token deployment IDs' with a specific condition 'for a given deployer address'. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like deploy_token (creation) and get_token_info (details on a single token).

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 like get_deployment or get_token_info. The description only states what the tool does without any context on selection criteria or prerequisites.

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