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

Goes well beyond the sparse annotations by disclosing authentication requirements, the need for a challenge-sign-verify flow, balance-gated paths, and contribution points. This gives the agent actionable behavioral knowledge that is not present in the schema or annotations.

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 tight sentences with no filler. The purpose is front-loaded, and each sentence adds distinct value: purpose, auth prerequisite, tagPath prerequisite, balance gating, and incentive.

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 6-parameter tool with nested objects and no output schema, the description covers the most critical operational context: auth, prerequisites, and special constraints. It does not describe the success response or error format, but the schema already handles metadata error details, and the missing pieces are minor for invocation.

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% and the schema already documents all parameters richly. The description adds extra semantic value for tagPath by explaining that it must come from get_categories and that some paths are balance-gated, which is information the schema does not convey.

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 and resource: 'Create a new Radix Wiki page.' This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling edit_page, and the scope of the operation is unambiguous.

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?

Provides concrete usage context: a required ROLA bearer token, a link to the auth flow, and an explicit prerequisite ('Call get_categories first for a valid tagPath'). It does not explicitly name edit_page as the alternative for existing pages, but the create-versus-edit distinction is clear enough.

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