Collection stats

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavioral context: on-chain address decoding that works without marketplace indexing, and the self-issued free OpenSea key or OPENSEA_API_KEY fallback with a collection-match check before ranking floors.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose before elaboration, and every sentence carries information (input types, decoding behavior, OpenSea conditions, use cases). Dense but not padded, though the long parentheticals reduce scannability.

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 no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden and does so fully, naming floor, supply, royalty, 7-day floor trend, and largest holders with share of supply. Inputs, fallback behavior, and outputs are all covered.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description goes slightly beyond the schema by clarifying that addresses are decoded straight from chain and that the OpenSea view can be triggered implicitly by registry entries rather than only by passing openseaSlug.

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?

States a specific verb (stats) and resource (collection) and enumerates the accepted identifier types (registry id, ME symbol, Core address). An agent immediately knows what it retrieves and which inputs it accepts, distinguishing it from narrower siblings like get_floor_prices.

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 explains the conditions under which the OpenSea cross-marketplace view is added (key availability, openseaSlug, registry entries) and even lists the questions it answers. However, it never names or routes to overlapping siblings such as get_floor_prices or get_collection_holders, leaving the agent to infer when this aggregate tool is preferable.

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