Indexer: Transfers to address (incoming) (v1)

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows it's a safe read operation. The description adds valuable behavioral details: it accepts both VNS names and hex addresses for the 'address' parameter, and token symbols for 'tokenAddress'. It also discloses that it's a directional filter of getTransfersOfAccount. 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?

The description is two sentences plus a note, all front-loaded with essential information. Every sentence adds value: the first states the purpose, the second adds parameter details, and the note provides usage guidance. No redundant or vague statements.

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 has 6 parameters, an output schema, and is a query tool, the description is fairly complete. It covers purpose, usage, key parameter details, and relationship to siblings. It could optionally mention pagination defaults, but the schema already documents page/size/cursor. The existence of an output schema reduces the need to describe return values. Overall sufficient.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by clarifying that the 'address' parameter accepts both VNS names and 0x hex addresses, and that 'tokenAddress' accepts token symbols like VET, VTHO, B3TR in addition to hex addresses. This helps the agent understand valid input formats.

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 explicitly states the tool queries the VeWorld Indexer for incoming transfers, using a specific endpoint. It clearly states the resource (transfers to address) and the action (query). It also distinguishes from getTransfersOfAccount by noting it's a directional filter, which differentiates it from siblings.

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 explicit usage guidance: 'Use for 'incoming transfers' or 'receipts to wallet'.' It also gives a strong preference for the broader tool: 'prefer using getTransfersOfAccount unless you specifically need only incoming transfers.' This clearly tells the agent when to use this tool versus alternatives.

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