Who holds every item in a collection

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

The description goes well beyond the readOnlyHint and openWorldHint annotations. It discloses that listed items show the marketplace's escrow as owner rather than the seller, that holder rows carry a ROLE field with specific meanings (issuer, venue-escrow, wallet, unknown), and that the issuer role is read from the chain and says nothing about how an item got there. It also explains the 'unknown' role condition. This is rich behavioral context that an agent needs to interpret results correctly.

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 dense but well-organized, front-loading the core purpose and key differentiator. Every sentence adds information, and the examples are useful. It is longer than average, but the length is justified by the behavioral nuances (roles, escrow ownership) that are essential for correct interpretation. Slight redundancy in the role explanation could be tightened, but overall it earns its 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?

For a read-only census tool with 100% schema coverage and no output schema, the description is remarkably complete. It covers what the tool returns (rows plus holder count per address, largest first), how filtering works, how to interpret roles, and the escrow caveat. It even points to a sibling tool for follow-up provenance questions. There is no critical missing information an agent would need to invoke or interpret this tool correctly.

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%, so the schema already documents all five parameters. The description adds meaningful context beyond the schema: it explains the purpose of trait/value filtering with a concrete example ('Item Type = Pack') and namePrefix with an example ('Gold Series - Aces'). It also clarifies that collection is an ADDRESS and how to obtain one. This adds value beyond the schema, though the schema already carries most of the parameter documentation.

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 precise verb and resource: 'CENSUS of a Core collection: every asset grouped under it, with its current owner, straight from the chain's asset index.' It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools by stating it is the only tool that sees unlisted items, and it provides concrete example questions. This makes the tool's purpose unmistakable and differentiates it from collection-wide tools that read marketplace listing books.

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 description explicitly states when to use this tool versus alternatives: it is the only tool that sees items nobody has listed, while other collection-wide tools read a marketplace's listing book. It also names a specific alternative, get_asset_provenance, for seeing who handed an item over when it is listed. This gives clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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