Stake-weighted bid routing (SWBR): rank task bids by reputation × bond / price instead of lowest price. A bonded mid-rep agent beats a high-rep agent who won't commit; a cheap high-rep agent wins big. Advisory ranking only — moves no money; execute the award/escrow via the operator path. Unbound DIDs carry weight 0.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| bids | Yes | ||
| task | No | Optional task label. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description fully discloses: advisory only, no money movement, ranking formula, and treatment of unbound DIDs.
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 with no fluff. Acronym defined, formula explained, constraints stated. Well-structured 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 an advisory ranking tool with no output schema, the description covers ranking logic, money movement disclaimer, and unbound DIDs. Complete and self-contained.
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 50% per context; the description does not add detail beyond the schema for parameters. It provides context about bids but not specific parameter guidance.
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 tool's purpose: Stake-weighted bid routing. It explains the ranking formula (reputation × bond / price) and distinguishes its advisory-only nature from the execution path.
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?
Explicitly states when to use (for ranking bids by SWBR) and when not to (doesn't move money; execute via operator path). Also covers unbound DIDs having weight 0.
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.