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

Goes well beyond the annotations: it discloses the conditional return payload (live listings only when an OpenSea API key is configured), names the exact returned fields, identifies the listings as Seaport orders, and states the fulfillment prerequisite (a Seaport-capable wallet with funds). That is precisely the operational context a read-only annotation cannot convey.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with what the tool returns, then the conditional payload, then the fulfillment path. No filler and no repetition of the title or annotations.

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 no parameters and no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden itself and does so fully: it enumerates the always-present fields, the conditional listing fields, and the practical next step for acting on those listings. Nothing needed to call or act on this tool correctly is missing.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate and the baseline for a parameterless tool applies. The mention of server-side API-key state is the only input-like condition and it is explained.

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?

States a specific verb+resource (pieces currently for sale) plus the ordering (cheapest first) and the agent-facing goal (COLLECT). It is immediately distinguishable from koine_get_piece or the nonce_* tools by resource, but it never names its closest sibling koine_list_genesis, so the boundary between the two listing tools is left to inference.

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?

Usage is only implied through the phrase 'so an agent can COLLECT' and the fulfillment note. There is no explicit when-to-use statement, no when-not (e.g. when you already hold a token id), and no pointer to koine_list_genesis as the alternative listing source, so the agent must infer the selection rule.

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