discover_endpoints

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the tool is 'FREE' which is useful cost information, and 'x402 Bazaar compatible' provides integration context. However, it doesn't describe response format, rate limits, authentication requirements, or error behavior that would be important for a discovery tool.

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 efficient with just 10 words across two sentences. The first sentence states the core purpose, the second adds important qualifiers. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or unnecessary elaboration.

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 zero-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description provides adequate basic information about what the tool does. However, it lacks details about the response format, what 'pricing and metadata' specifically includes, and how the discovered endpoints are structured or returned to the 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?

The tool has 0 parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema fully documents the lack of inputs. The description appropriately doesn't waste space discussing parameters that don't exist, maintaining focus on the tool's purpose and behavior.

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 specific action ('Discover all available AsterPay API endpoints') and resource ('AsterPay API endpoints'), with additional scope details ('with pricing and metadata'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on API endpoint discovery rather than AI processing, crypto data, or wallet operations.

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 provides clear context for when to use this tool ('Discover all available AsterPay API endpoints with pricing and metadata') and includes compatibility information ('x402 Bazaar compatible'). However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it or name specific alternatives among the sibling tools for similar purposes.

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