soul_calls

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses that the data is free, includes cryptographic proof elements (lock_hash, merkle root, on-chain tx), and is checkable. This goes beyond the schema, though it doesn't explicitly state it's read-only or handle edge cases.

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, leading with the purpose, then usage, then argument. It's slightly verbose with the 'FREE' note and explanatory sentence about verifiability, but each part adds value. The argument definition is brief.

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 single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description explains the output composition (open predictions and scored results) and mentions key fields (lock_hash, merkle root, on-chain tx). It's sufficient for an agent to understand what will be returned, though pagination or size limits are not addressed.

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 schema provides no description for token_id. The description adds meaning by defining it as 'minted soul' and giving a range (1-273), which is essential for correct usage. This compensates for the 0% schema coverage.

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's function: retrieving the full public record for a single soul, including open predictions and scored results. It differentiates by emphasizing 'ONE' soul and the verification aspect, which sets it apart from broader tools like souls_in_wallet.

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 'Use this when' with two scenarios: inspecting details or verifying a soul. This provides clear guidance on when to invoke the tool, though it doesn't mention alternatives or when not to use it.

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