Read XRC-729 OSTC JSON

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

The description correctly identifies the tool as 'Read-only', implying no state change. However, it does not disclose potential failure modes (e.g., invalid ostcId reverts), gas cost, or whether it returns raw JSON or a stringified object. Without annotations, more detail would be beneficial.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that conveys the essential function and output. No unnecessary words or 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?

The tool is simple with two parameters and no output schema. While the description covers the basic operation, it omits details on parameter meaning, expected response format (e.g., the structure of the JSON string), and error behavior, leaving some gaps for an agent.

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 input schema defines two parameters (address, ostcId) with regex and length constraints, but the description only mentions ostcId in the function call and does not explain either parameter's purpose. With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to add value beyond the schema.

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 performs a read-only eth_call to XRC729.getOSTC(ostcId) and returns the runtime OSTC JSON string. It clearly identifies the action (read), resource (OSTC), method (eth_call), and output, distinguishing it from other sibling tools like get_xrc729_ostc_state.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools such as get_xrc729_ostc_state or read_xrc137_rule_json, the description lacks any context for selection, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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