spraay_resolve

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

The annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the description is not required to reiterate that. The description adds valuable behavioral context: it clarifies that both forward lookups (name to address) and reverse lookups (address to name) are supported, and it discloses the cost of $0.001 USDC. These details go beyond what annotations provide.

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 highly concise, consisting of just two sentences. Every word serves a purpose: it states the function, the supported name types, the lookup directions, and the cost. There is no redundancy or irrelevant information.

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 tool's simplicity (single parameter, clear schema, available output schema), the description covers all essential aspects: supported name services, both operations (forward and reverse), and cost. No additional information is needed for effective use.

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 already provides a detailed description of the 'name' parameter with formatting examples and mode hints. With 100% schema coverage, the baseline is 3. The tool description adds general context but no additional parameter-specific semantics beyond the cost mention.

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 that the tool resolves ENS names and Basenames to wallet addresses and can perform reverse lookups. The verb 'resolve' and the specific resources (ENS, Basenames, addresses) make the purpose unambiguous. However, it does not differentiate itself from the sibling tool 'spraay_free_resolve' that likely provides a free 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 description mentions the cost ($0.001 USDC) but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus its free counterpart or any prerequisites. There's no mention of when not to use it or alternatives, leaving the agent to infer based on cost alone.

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