get_merkle_proof

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: it returns a Merkle proof array, only works for actively-priced products (market_price > 0), and zero-price entries cannot be proven. It also explains the overall mechanism (Merkle root on LiteForge).

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 well-structured with sections, front-loading the purpose. While slightly verbose, every sentence adds value (e.g., why it matters, the oracle process, the zero-price note). It could be tightened but remains effective.

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 presence of an output schema (not shown but indicated), the description still provides essential context about what the tool returns (Merkle proof array) and its application. It also covers limitations (zero-price items) and the overall workflow, making it complete for an AI agent.

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% with a single parameter (product_id) described as 'TCGPlayer product ID.' The description adds a concrete example ('e.g. 98580 for Shadowless Charizard') and explains the role of the parameter in verification, adding value beyond the schema.

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 starts with 'Get a Merkle proof for on-chain price verification on LitecoinVM,' clearly stating the specific verb and resource. It distinguishes this tool from siblings like get_price by emphasizing cryptographic verification versus trusting a server.

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 when to use this tool (to verify prices on-chain without trusting a server) and provides context about the underlying oracle. It does not explicitly mention alternative tools or when not to use it, but the context implies other tools (like get_price) for trusted scenarios.

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