Get XRC-729 authority

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and clearly discloses read-only behavior, listing specific functions read and explicitly stating it never signs, submits, executes, or creates a handoff. It also mentions detecting zero-address executor wildcard. It lacks details on edge cases like contract call failure, but overall provides solid 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?

Two sentences, no extra words. Front-loaded with the key purpose 'Read-only authority lookup'. Every sentence adds value without repetition.

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 simple input schema and no output schema, the description adequately covers intent and behavior. It mentions what is read, which gives agents an idea of the return value. However, it doesn't specify output structure, which may be needed for complex data, but remains sufficient for this tool's apparent simplicity.

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 only parameter, orchestration, is described as 'for one XRC-729 orchestration contract', providing context beyond the schema's pattern. Schema coverage is 0%, so the description compensates by clarifying the parameter's role, though it could more explicitly state it is a contract address.

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 it is a read-only authority lookup for one XRC-729 orchestration contract, specifying the exact functions read (owner()/getOwner() and getExecutorList()) and detecting zero-address executor wildcard. It distinguishes from sibling tools by explicitly stating it never signs, submits, executes, or creates a handoff.

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 implies usage for read-only authority queries and explicitly states it does not perform write operations, helping agents avoid action-based tools. However, it does not provide explicit alternatives or conditions for when not to use this tool compared to other authority-related siblings like get_xrc_owner_summary.

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