guild_passport

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the burden of explaining behavior. It discloses that the tool returns a W3C VC or an exact self-registration next step if the identity is not registered, which gives a clear picture of outcomes without overpromising.

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 compact and well-structured. It communicates the core function, the acceptable parameter values, example calls, and expected return behavior in a few concise sentences without unnecessary repetition.

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 is complete enough for a low-complexity single-parameter tool. It explains the input flexibility, the output format, and the special case for unregistered identities. It does not cover potential errors or side effects, but those are not strongly implied by the tool's read-oriented purpose.

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 input schema only defines agent_id as a required string with no description. The description adds meaningful context by explaining that agent_id can be either a Guild agent identifier or a W3C did, and it provides concrete examples to illustrate both forms.

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: to get a portable, Guild-signed Agent Passport in W3C VC form. It distinguishes itself from guild_verify by explicitly saying to verify others' passports with guild_verify.

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 concrete examples of how to call the tool with either a Guild agent_id or a W3C did, and clarifies the expected result. It also implies when to use this tool versus guild_verify, though it could be even more explicit about alternative tools.

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