rune_get

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only states 'Retrieve information', implying a read-only operation. It mentions expected return fields (supply, minting status, transactions) but lacks any disclosure of side effects, authentication needs, rate limits, or error behavior.

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 extremely concise, consisting of two short sentences that immediately convey the tool's purpose without extraneous information. It front-loads the verb and resource.

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 low complexity (one parameter, no output schema), the description adequately covers what it retrieves (details, supply, minting status, transactions). It could be enhanced by mentioning potential error conditions or response format, but it is largely complete for a simple lookup.

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 has 0% description coverage for the required 'identifier' parameter. The description compensates by explaining it accepts a rune name or ID and provides concrete examples ('UNCOMMON•GOODS', '1:0'), which adds significant meaning beyond the schema's bare type definition.

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 retrieves information about a specific Bitcoin Rune by name or ID, with examples. It differentiates from sibling tools that list runes or get address-related rune data, but does not explicitly contrast them.

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 indicates when to use this tool (to get details about a specific rune token), but does not specify when not to use it or mention alternative sibling tools like runes_latest_get or address_rune_deltas_get.

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