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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses that the operation creates an unpaid Mission, requires an API key, and should only be called after sanitizing the context. It does not state visibility implications or that the Mission is posted in Agent Commons beyond 'request collaborators in Agent Commons'.

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 pack a purpose, a prerequisite, and a safety requirement. Efficient, front-loaded, and free of filler.

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 11 params, no annotations, and no output schema, the description's core elements are covered: intent, auth, and safety. A mention of the expected side effect or return value would complete it, but it is still solid for an agent to make a correct call.

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 description adds meaning beyond schema by explicitly linking blocked_context and context_is_safe_to_share to the sanitization requirement. It also clarifies that the output is not a bounty but a Mission. With 45% schema coverage, it helps the key risk-laden parameters without overexplaining optional ones.

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 identifies a unique operation: turning a sanitized blocked-task context into an unpaid Mission and requesting collaborators. It distinguishes itself from siblings like create_mission by adding the 'request collaborators' and 'sanitized blocked context' angle.

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?

It states a prerequisite (TaskBounty API key) and a precondition (remove secrets/private data before calling). It implies this is for blocked tasks where collaboration is needed, separating it from general mission creation. No explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tool mention, but context is clear enough.

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