get_service

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

Even without annotations, the description discloses a key behavioral nuance: the per-endpoint `price` field is a raw on-chain atomic token amount, not US dollars, and clarifies that prices are in USD. It also implies that include_series is off by default, but omits auth or error behavior, which is acceptable for a read-only getter.

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 compact yet information-dense. It front-loads the core function, provides usage guidance, and finishes with a critical price-unit warning. Each sentence earns its place, though it is slightly longer than the bare minimum.

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?

With only two parameters and no output schema, the description gives a comprehensive account of the returned fields and clarifies the price units. It lacks error handling or pagination details, but for a single-service getter, it is sufficiently complete.

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 already provides 100% coverage for both parameters, describing slug and include_series with defaults. The tool description does not add parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema states; the price caveat relates to the response, not the parameters. Baseline 3 applies due to high schema coverage.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Get full detail for one x402 service by slug' and enumerates the exact data returned (live status, uptime, response time, networks, endpoint prices). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_x402_services, which lists services.

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 after search_x402_services to inspect a specific service,' providing a clear when-to-use directive. However, it does not mention when not to use it or offer alternatives like check_health or find_best_service, so it falls short of a 5.

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