IPFS: Fetch content by CID

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, etc. Description adds transparency about the proxy URL and post-processing behavior (extracting Discourse links), which goes beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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?

Description is front-loaded with core purpose and includes necessary post-processing instructions. Slightly lengthy but each sentence adds value; could be slightly more concise but overall well-structured.

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 comprehensive annotations and an output schema, the description covers usage context, proxy, common use case, and subsequent steps, making it fully complete for agent decision-making.

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% for the single 'cid' parameter with description 'IPFS Content Identifier (CID)'. The description does not add new semantics beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Clearly states the tool fetches IPFS content by CID using the VeChain gateway proxy. Specifies a common use case (B3TR proposal descriptions) and distinguishes from sibling tools like getDiscourseTopic by instructing post-processing.

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?

Explicitly provides when to use (fetch IPFS content, especially proposals) and when to use siblings (extract Discourse links, optionally call getDiscourseTopic). Gives clear context and alternatives.

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