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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it only restates the install prerequisite (already mirrored in the wallet parameter description) and the scale. It omits whether a rating is one-time or updatable, whether a wallet signature is required, and what a successful call returns.

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 short sentences, zero padding, with the action and its scale front-loaded ahead of the precondition. Every clause 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?

For a simple 3-param mutation with no output schema or annotations, the definition covers the essential precondition but leaves behavior on repeat ratings, permissions, and error cases unaddressed. Adequate for a minimal call, not complete.

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 100%, so all three parameters (skill_id, wallet, rating) are already documented in the schema. The description adds no format or constraint detail beyond what the schema provides, making 3 the correct baseline.

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 (rate) and resource (installed marketplace skill) plus the scale, which is enough for an agent to identify the action. It does not name or contrast against any sibling tool, but no sibling performs ratings, so differentiation is not critical.

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?

'Must have installed the skill first' is an explicit, actionable prerequisite that tells the agent when this tool is valid. It gives clear context but no exclusions or alternative-tool routing, which is acceptable given no sibling overlaps.

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