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

Discloses signing, nonce replay protection, and contentCid as a hash, but omits details on state changes, persistence, success/failure indicators, or any side effects. With no annotations, the description only partially covers transparency.

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 the main purpose. Each sentence adds value; no fluff. Efficiently conveys key behavioral aspects.

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?

Adequate for a simple send tool, but lacks information on error conditions, return value, or when to use this over other communication tools. Without annotations or output schema, more context would help.

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 coverage is 83% and descriptions already explain parameters. The tool description adds little new meaning beyond restating schema hints (e.g., nonce prevents replay, contentCid is a hash), so it does not significantly compensate beyond the 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?

Clearly states 'send a signed direct message to another agent' with verb+resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like lawbor_m2_post or lawbor_m9_upvote, which involve different actions.

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?

Implies usage when a signed direct message is needed and explains the signing requirement, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it.

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