erc8004_resolve_agent_services

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, and description adds the output types (service endpoints). However, no disclosure of behavior for missing/malformed registration files or other edge cases. Added value is modest beyond annotations.

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?

Single sentence with no waste, front-loaded with the core action and output. Efficient and clear.

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 simplicity (1 param, no output schema, readOnlyHint annotation), the description is fairly complete. It covers what it does and what it returns. Could mention error handling or output format, but adequate.

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 descriptions cover 100% of the single parameter agentId. The tool description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema's example format. 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?

Description clearly states the action (parse/return), resource (agent's registration file), and output (typed service endpoints like MCP, A2A, ENS, DID). It distinguishes from sibling tools like erc8004_get_agent which returns general agent metadata.

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?

Implied by name and description for resolving agent service endpoints, but no explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives like erc8004_get_agent or erc8004_get_agent_metadata. Lacks when-not-to-use or alternative suggestions.

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