guild_verify

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears the full burden of disclosing behavior. It states what is returned but does not mention whether the operation is read-only, whether it performs network calls, stores data, or has any side effects.

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: a clear purpose, a behavioral note, and a concrete example. No redundant or vague wording is present.

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 not fully self-contained for an agent: it lacks a description of the output schema, potential error conditions, and any side effects or access implications, especially given that annotations are absent.

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 only parameter, 'credential', has no schema description and the schema coverage is 0%. The example 'credential={...the VC they sent...}' gives a hint but does not clarify required fields, format, or constraints.

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 a specific verb ('Verify') and a specific resource ('Agent Passport another agent showed you'), and it distinguishes this from similar verification tools by focusing on the passport object and the additional outcome of discovering the Guild's own tools.

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 implies usage when another agent presents a passport and notes that this is also how the Guild's tools are discovered, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over sibling verification tools 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.