Prepare a transaction to expire an overdue assigned job. Anyone can call if the job duration has elapsed. Employer gets refunded, agent bond is slashed.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| jobId | Yes | The job ID to expire |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behavioral effects: 'Employer gets refunded, agent bond is slashed.' It also hints at a non-executing action by saying 'Prepare a transaction,' but does not elaborate on the transaction flow or return format. This is a reasonable level of transparency for a tool with these consequences.
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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, and contains no filler. Each sentence contributes necessary information: what the tool does, when to use it, and what happens as a result. This is concise 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?
For a single-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the purpose, the trigger condition, and the consequences. It does not explain the full transaction process or return values, but given the simplicity of the tool, this is sufficiently complete for an agent to decide whether to call it.
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 already covers 100% of the parameter (jobId) with its own description. The tool description adds context about 'overdue assigned job' but does not provide additional semantics beyond what the schema states. Thus, the description adds minimal value over 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 clearly states the tool's purpose: to prepare a transaction for expiring an overdue assigned job. It includes the specific verb 'expire' and the resource, but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like cancel_job or finalize_job. The distinct action and context make the purpose clear enough.
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 provides an explicit usage condition: 'Anyone can call if the job duration has elapsed.' This clearly indicates when to use the tool. It does not mention when not to use it or alternatives, but the condition is specific and actionable, so the guidelines are adequate.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a distinct purpose with clear boundaries: job lifecycle (create_job, apply_for_job, cancel_job, request_job_completion, finalize_job, expire_job), validation (approve_job, disapprove_job, dispute_job), metadata handling (fetch_job_metadata, upload_to_ipfs), and queries (list_jobs, get_job, get_agent_reputation, check_agent_identity, get_protocol_info, register_agent). No overlapping functionality exists.
All 17 tools follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern (e.g., create_job, list_jobs, fetch_job_metadata). The naming is highly predictable, with verbs like create, get, list, apply, approve, cancel, check, upload, and register consistently paired with relevant nouns.
17 tools is well-scoped for a job management platform covering the full lifecycle from creation to completion, including validation, disputes, metadata handling, and queries. Each tool earns its place, with no redundancy, and the count aligns with the complexity of the domain.
The toolset provides complete coverage for the AGI Alpha job platform: full CRUD/lifecycle (create, list, get, apply, cancel, complete, finalize, expire), validation workflows (approve, disapprove, dispute), identity and reputation management (register_agent, check_agent_identity, get_agent_reputation), metadata handling (upload_to_ipfs, fetch_job_metadata), and protocol info. No gaps are apparent.
