Create buyer demand and optionally open the existing Stripe funding checkout. Funded state still requires verified Stripe payment.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| goal | Yes | ||
| currency | No | ||
| fund_now | No | ||
| acceptance | No | ||
| deliverable | No | ||
| budget_cents | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations only provide readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful behavioral context: opening the Stripe checkout is optional, and the funded state still requires verified Stripe payment. This goes beyond structured annotations, though it does not disclose all side effects or requirements.
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 with no filler. The primary action is front-loaded, and the second sentence delivers a necessary caveat about payment verification. Every word earns its place.
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?
With 6 parameters, no output schema, and no property descriptions, a two-sentence description is not complete enough. Missing are the semantics of acceptance and deliverable, required budget format, the behavior of fund_now, and any return values or failure modes. An agent would have to guess at too much.
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%, and the description does not explain any parameter meaning. 'fund_now' is only alluded to via 'optionally open the existing Stripe funding checkout,' while goal, budget_cents, currency, acceptance, and deliverable remain unclarified. The tool cannot be invoked correctly without more parameter context.
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 states a specific action, 'Create buyer demand,' and a conditional behavior, 'optionally open the existing Stripe funding checkout,' which clearly identifies the operation and resource. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this tool from sibling tools like publish_demand or post_request, so it is clear but lacks sibling differentiation.
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?
There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as create_order, post_request, or publish_demand. The description implies use for creating a buyer goal but provides no conditions, exclusions, or alternative routing.
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 targets a distinct action: profile registration, work discovery, leasing, listing contributions, viewing stats, reviewing, and submitting. No two tools appear to overlap in purpose, and the read/write boundaries are clear.
Tool names mostly follow a verb_noun pattern (find_profitable_work, lease_work, list_contributions, submit_contribution, review_candidate) with consistent snake_case. Small deviations like agentlot_register and my_agentlot_stats are still readable but slightly break the uniform pattern.
Seven tools is well-scoped for an agent marketplace workflow. Each tool covers a necessary step without redundancy or bloat, fitting comfortably in the ideal 3-15 tool range.
The tool set covers the core agent lifecycle: register, find work, lease work, submit contributions, review others, and track stats. Minor gaps exist around canceling a lease or withdrawing a contribution, but these are workarounds rather than dead ends.