signNote

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool signs a note event but does not explain what happens after signing (e.g., whether it returns a signed event, stores it, or requires further steps), nor does it cover permissions, side effects, or error handling, leaving significant gaps.

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 a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words, making it highly concise and front-loaded. It directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary elaboration.

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 the complexity of signing operations (involving cryptographic keys and event structures), no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain the output (e.g., signed event format), error cases, or integration with other tools, leaving the agent with incomplete context for effective use.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents the parameters (privateKey and noteEvent). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, such as format details or usage examples, but the high coverage justifies the baseline score of 3.

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 action ('sign') and resource ('a note event with a private key'), making the purpose evident. However, it does not differentiate this tool from siblings like 'postNote' or 'publishNote', which might involve signing implicitly, so it lacks explicit sibling distinction.

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 versus alternatives such as 'postNote' or 'publishNote', which may handle signing internally. The description implies usage for signing notes but offers no context on prerequisites, exclusions, or comparisons to sibling tools.

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