koios_account_info_cached

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the key behavioral trait of using cached data (faster but potentially stale), which is valuable. However, it does not elaborate on the caching mechanism, response format, or explicitly confirm read-only nature (though 'get' implies it). This is moderate disclosure, not comprehensive.

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, front-loaded with the action and resource, and efficiently appends the trade-off. Every phrase contributes meaning without redundancy or excess length.

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 simplicity of a cached read tool, the description successfully conveys the core behavior and trade-off. The schema covers all parameters, and the description is sufficient for basic usage. However, the lack of an output schema and explicit cross-reference to the non-cached sibling prevents a perfect completeness score.

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 provides descriptions for 100% of the 5 parameters, meeting the high-coverage baseline of 3. The tool description adds no additional parameter context beyond what the schema already documents, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and identifies the resource ('cached stake account information'), making the purpose clear. The 'cached' modifier distinguishes it from the sibling koios_account_info, though it does not explicitly name the alternative.

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 phrase 'faster but may be slightly stale' implies when to use this tool (when speed is preferred and slight staleness is acceptable), but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention the fresh-data alternative (koios_account_info). The guidance remains implicit rather than explicit.

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