erc8183_create_job

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

Annotations include destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=true, but the description adds no behavioral context beyond the verb 'create.' It fails to note potential on-chain side effects, requirements (e.g., funding), or irreversibility, thus adding no value beyond the 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?

The description is extremely concise (five words) and front-loaded, but it is under-specified for a tool with six parameters and no output schema. While it wastes no words, it omits context that would make it appropriately sized.

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 state-changing tool with multiple parameters and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It fails to explain the job lifecycle (e.g., funding, submission), expected return values, or side effects, forcing the agent to infer this from sibling tool names.

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 each parameter having a description, so the baseline is 3. The tool description does not add any parameter semantics or relationships, providing no additional insight beyond the schema.

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 identifies the action (create) and the resource (an ERC-8183 job). The ERC-8183 standard in the tool name distinguishes it from similar sibling tools like acp_create_job, making the purpose 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool, prerequisites, or how it differs from alternatives. The sibling list includes acp_create_job and other erc8183 tools, but the description does not mention them or indicate the appropriate context for selecting this tool.

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