Request an intro to a project's founder on behalf of the API key's owner. The founder receives an email with the investor's GitHub handle. (requires API key)
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | Yes | Project slug | |
| message | Yes | Intro message from the investor (max 2000 chars) |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are present, so the description must bear the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions that the founder receives an email and that the tool requires an API key, but does not explain whether the operation is synchronous, what happens on failure, or if it creates a persistent record. This is insufficient for a mutation-like 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?
Two sentences, each earning its place. Front-loaded with the main action, followed by a key behavioral detail and a requirement. No extraneous information.
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?
Given no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the basic purpose and a key side effect. However, it omits the return value or response format, error handling, and how to retrieve the slug. The sibling tools list suggests integrations but this is not leveraged.
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 100%, with short descriptions for both parameters. The description adds value by noting that the founder receives the investor's GitHub handle automatically, but does not clarify where the 'slug' comes from or how to obtain it. Additional context would improve usability.
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?
Description clearly states the action 'Request an intro to a project's founder' and specifies it is done on behalf of the API key's owner. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_intros and send_intro_message.
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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives like send_intro_message or read_intro_thread. It provides basic context (requires API key, founder receives email with GitHub handle) but lacks explicit guidance on prerequisites or exclusions.
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.
Each tool targets a distinct action on a specific resource (commitments, intros, projects, watches) with no overlap. For example, list_projects vs search_projects differ by filtering, and list_watches vs watch_project are clearly separate.
All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case, e.g., acknowledge_commitment, list_projects, update_watch. The verbs are imperative and the nouns clearly indicate the resource.
14 tools cover the core interactions of a fundraising platform—project discovery, pipeline management, intros, and commitments—without being bloated or insufficient.
The tool set covers the investor and founder journey well, but lacks project creation/update tools for founders, which is a minor gap given the server's focus on round interactions.