List indexed XRC contracts

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

Description declares the tool is read-only, which is beneficial given no annotations. However, it lacks details on side effects, authorization, rate limits, or pagination behavior (e.g., default page, sort order). Could be more transparent.

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, no redundant words, front-loaded with core information. Efficient and 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?

Given 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too brief. It omits details on pagination, default sorting, and response format. A more complete description would enhance usability.

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 description coverage is 0%. Description mentions filtering by 'owner' and 'type' but does not specify address format or enum values. 'page' and 'limit' are not addressed, leaving their purpose unclear. The description only partially compensates for missing schema documentation.

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 tool's function: listing XRC-137/XRC-729 contracts globally or filtered by owner/type. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_xrc_contract' and 'get_xrc_owner_summary'.

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?

Description implies when to use (to list contracts with optional filters) but does not explicitly mention when not to use or provide alternative tools. Context from sibling names helps, but formal exclusion is missing.

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