bridge_erc8004_lookup

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

No annotations available; description only states return values, missing behavioral traits such as whether it is read-only, any permissions needed, or side effects. The word 'Returns' provides minimal transparency.

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?

Three short, direct sentences with no extraneous information. Front-loaded with 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?

For a simple 1-parameter lookup without output schema, the description covers what the tool does and its main return components. However, it lacks details on the return format or structure, which could be helpful given no output schema.

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% with description for the parameter. The tool description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema provides (numeric token ID). Baseline score.

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 action 'Look up' and resource 'ERC-8004 on-chain agent', and what is returned (trust score, identity, verdict). However, does not differentiate from similar sibling 'bridge_erc8004_trust_check', which may cause confusion.

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?

Mentions 'Free' but provides no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like bridge_erc8004_trust_check, nor 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.