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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the nsec is returned once and then forgotten by the operator, detailing the consequences and user responsibilities thoroughly.

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 concise and front-loaded with the main action, followed by essential details in a clear, structured manner with no unnecessary words.

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?

The description explains the core behavior and consequences but omits explanation of two parameters (npub, dpop_token) and does not reference the output schema. Given the tool's complexity, it is not fully 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?

The description elaborates on the required 'acknowledgment' parameter with the exact string, but does not explain 'npub' or 'dpop_token'. With 33% schema coverage, the description compensates partially but not fully.

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 clearly states the action: 'Return the plaintext nsec once and remove it from operator storage.' It specifies the resource (plaintext nsec) and distinguishes from sibling optionality_escrow_nsec, which likely performs the opposite operation.

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 explicit guidance on the required acknowledgment string and outlines post-call responsibilities. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, though the sibling list suggests the inverse tool exists.

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