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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions that reveals include Merkle paths and are 'matured', but does not state that the operation is read-only, whether pagination is applied, what happens with the 'month' filter, or any limitations. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the tool name.

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 extremely concise, containing no filler words. It front-loads the core resource ('Matured signal reveals') and immediately notes the optional parameters. However, the structure is fragmentary: the first clause lacks a verb, and the second sentence is incomplete. Still, it is appropriately brief for the tool's simplicity.

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 that there are no annotations and the description is sparse, the tool is under-specified for an agent. It does not clarify what 'matured' means, how the month filter interacts with reveals, or how this tool differs from related listing tools. The presence of an output schema helps, but the description alone does not provide enough context for reliable selection and invocation.

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 schema has zero description coverage for its properties. The description adds some semantics by noting that 'month' is in YYYY-MM format and that both month and limit are optional. However, it does not explain the exact meaning of 'limit' (e.g., max number of reveals) or how 'month' filters the results. This partial compensation earns a mid-range score.

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 identifies the resource ('signal reveals') and a key attribute ('Matured', 'with Merkle paths'), making the tool's function recognizable. However, it lacks an explicit verb; the action is only implied by the tool name 'list_reveals'. It does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like 'list_attestations' or 'latest_signals'.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of scenarios, exclusions, or comparisons to sibling tools such as 'latest_signals' or 'verify_reveal'. The only hint is the phrase 'Matured signal reveals', which implies use when interested in matured reveals, but this is not explicit.

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