koios_pool_metadata

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, yet it only states the basic function. It does not mention that it relies on off-chain metadata, the absence of metadata for some pools, pagination behavior, or any response details, leaving the agent without important context.

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, front-loaded sentence with no superfluous words. It communicates the essential purpose efficiently and is appropriately sized for a straightforward lookup tool.

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?

Although the schema thoroughly documents parameters, the description lacks information about the return structure or the nature of pool metadata, especially given there is no output schema. This incompleteness could leave an agent uncertain about what to expect from the tool's response.

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 input schema provides descriptions for all parameters, including _pool_bech32_ids, limit, order, offset, and select, achieving 100% coverage. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond implying that 'specific stake pools' corresponds to the required pool ID array, so the baseline 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 clearly states the action (get) and resource (metadata for specific stake pools), and specifies that it operates on specific pools, which aligns with the required parameter. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like pool_info or pool_list, though 'metadata' suggests a distinct purpose.

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 such as koios_pool_info or koios_pool_list. The description implies usage for specific pool IDs but offers no context, exclusions, or alternative recommendations.

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