build_deepfreeze_unsigned

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden and discloses key traits: returns unsigned JSON + preflight, never signs, defaults to testnet, and mentions DeepFreeze amendment requirement. This adds value beyond the schema, though could mention the tool only assembles and does not submit.

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—two sentences that front-load the main purpose and efficiently cover key behaviors (unsigned, never signs, testnet default). No wasted words.

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 tool with 6 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is adequate but leaves gaps. It does not explain what 'preflight' means, nor does it mention prerequisites like needing an existing trustline. Return format details are minimal.

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 description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining the 'action' parameter's four possible values and their effects, and noting the 'network' default. However, other parameters (account, counterparty, currency, limitValue) are already adequately described in 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 states the tool assembles an unsigned TrustSet to toggle a freeze on a trustline, using a specific verb 'assemble' and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling build_*_unsigned tools by specifying the freeze action.

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 for assembling freeze transactions, listing action types. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. No sibling comparisons are provided.

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