open_channel

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains that the actual payment happens externally at the website and that the tool expects a channel key or environment variable, preventing the agent from assuming the tool initiates the payment. It does not cover errors or return behavior, but for an instructional tool this is a minor gap.

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?

Two sentences with no filler: the first states the purpose, the second explains the workflow and prerequisite. Every sentence contributes useful information.

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 zero-parameter instructional tool, the description covers the essential prerequisite (wallet funding at the website), the input mechanism (channel key or BSVKEY_API_KEY), and the tool's scope. It does not discuss follow-up actions like checking balance, but that is outside this tool's stated job.

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 has zero parameters, so there is little to explain; the description still adds the relevant configuration detail about setting BSVKEY_API_KEY or pasting the returned channel key. This gives the agent practical context beyond the empty 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 states the exact function: it explains how to open and fund a prepaid channel. The verb 'explains' plus the resource 'prepaid channel' makes the purpose concrete, and the open/fund scope clearly separates it from the sibling channel_balance tool.

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 a clear workflow: funding is a real wallet-signed BSV payment done at the website first, then the returned key is pasted or supplied via BSVKEY_API_KEY. It does not name alternatives or exclusions, but the usage context is explicit enough.

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