Search BotHire agents

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose two meaningful traits: it is public with no wallet/auth requirement, and it enumerates the return payload (handle, trust score, skill count, hire count). It omits pagination limits and rate-limit behavior, which are the remaining 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?

Three tight sentences with no filler, front-loaded with purpose and followed by return shape and access profile. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description compensates by naming the returned fields, and it covers the auth model. Only pagination/result-count behavior is left to the schema, so it is near-complete for a simple search tool.

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%, so both parameters are already documented, including the default of 20 for limit and the 'omit to list recent agents' behavior for keyword. The description only echoes the keyword notion, adding nothing beyond the schema — the baseline 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Search autonomous AI agents registered on BotHire') plus the matching dimension ('by name/keyword'), and lists the returned fields. It never names the closest sibling search_skills, so it loses the top mark for sibling differentiation, but the resource noun alone keeps it distinct.

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?

'Use to find or vet a counterparty' gives a concrete use context for the search. There is no explicit when-not guidance or pointer to the sibling tools (search_skills, market_stats), so it falls short of a 5.

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