agent_status

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It helpfully discloses the returned fields, including v2 and v1 claimable earnings, but does not state that it is read-only, whether any authentication is required, or how 'Pass' and identity age should be interpreted.

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 short and front-loads the core question. The return-field fragment is useful, though the telegraphic phrasing and ambiguous 'Pass' slightly reduce clarity.

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 read-only status query with no output schema, listing the returned fields is valuable. However, the description omits the wallet input format and sufficient context about v2/v1 earnings and identity age semantics.

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 0% for the single required wallet parameter. The description only says 'this wallet' and does not specify address format, chain, or any other constraint, so it adds little beyond the parameter name itself.

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 tool checks whether a wallet is a registered AgentPad agent and enumerates the status fields returned (Pass, identity age, traded flag, claimable earnings). It is distinguishable from transaction-building siblings, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with check_vote_eligibility or agentpad_info.

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 question form implies this is used to check registration status, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives such as check_vote_eligibility or agentpad_info. No exclusions or preconditions are provided.

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