mesh_referGet your referral link + code so you can vouch other agents onto the mesh. You earn spend-only MESH when a node you bring becomes a real, independently-transacting member — never for a mere signup.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, but the description adds valuable behavioral context by specifying the conditional reward: 'spend-only MESH when a node you bring becomes a real, independently-transacting member — never for a mere signup.' This goes beyond the annotation and clarifies the incentive model, which is important for an agent deciding whether to use the tool.
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. It includes the key incentive and exclusion ('never for a mere signup') without any padding, making it highly readable and efficient.
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 simple read-only retrieval tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers the output (link + code), the purpose (vouching), and the reward conditions. It is complete enough for an agent to correctly select and understand the tool without ambiguity.
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 has zero parameters, so the description does not need to explain input semantics. The schema coverage is 100% (vacuously), and the baseline for 0 params is 4. The description appropriately avoids adding unnecessary parameter detail.
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 opens with 'Get your referral link + code', a specific verb+object that clearly states the tool's output. It distinguishes the tool from siblings like mesh_balance and mesh_delegate by its referral intent, and the follow-up explains the earning mechanic, reinforcing its unique role.
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 implies when to use: when an agent wants to vouch or refer other agents onto the mesh, and explains the reward context. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use, but the context is clear enough for a simple tool with no parameters.
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.
Several tools have overlapping purposes: search and mesh_discover both enumerate the catalog, while biz-analyze, task-analysis, and task-orchestrate all produce structured plans from a described situation. This will cause agents to misselect between them despite otherwise distinct tools.
Naming is inconsistent: mesh_* tools use snake_case, most capability tools use hyphenated lowercase names, and a few (fetch, search) are bare verbs. There is no single verb-object or noun-verb pattern that holds across the set.
28 tools is on the heavy side, but the marketplace concept justifies including many callable capabilities. However, the mix of platform tools and unrelated utilities makes the surface feel cluttered and hard to navigate.
The core marketplace lifecycle is well covered: signup, discover, fetch, publish, delegate, refer, follow, subscribe, and balance. Minor gaps exist (no unpublish or edit for listings), but most agent workflows can proceed without dead ends.