Coinprism includes a link in the transaction that issues an asset using an OP_RETURN output. The link can be user defined, however otherwise directs to a Coinprism hosted page that includes a "contract details" field. Of course, I can't speak for Bytas, though I think that this type of functionality could be valuable.

That said, I have significant problems with the way that Coinprism associates contract details with an asset. First, the definitions are centrally hosted, and can be changed at will. Second, an asset can't be verified to be legit if the URL becomes invalid at some point in time. Further, even if you select a custom URL, you're required to have the http:// and .com.

I think proper implementation of an asset definition at issuance should be the hash of the contract in the OP_RETURN output. Somebody really creative could even store the contract with Namecoin and indexed by the hash of the contract. This is probably just a pipedream of mine though.

I don't know how this is all directly applicable to ChromaWallet given the drastic differences in implementation.