Claim the revealed artifact to keep it for yourself, transferring ownership of the time loop.
At the reveal: keep it for yourself instead. The loop changes hands.
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "claim_artifact"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions 'reveal' and 'loop changes hands' without explaining side effects, permissions, or consequences. The agent is left guessing about what happens.
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 short but not concise in conveying meaning. The phrasing 'At the reveal' and 'the loop changes hands' is jargon that may confuse. It could be more straightforward.
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 no output schema and no annotations, the tool is insufficiently described. The cryptic description leaves major gaps about the tool's behavior, making it hard for an agent to use correctly.
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?
There are no parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. While the description does not need to explain parameters, it fails to clarify the tool's function, which is its primary job. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the description adds little meaning.
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 'At the reveal: keep it for yourself instead. The loop changes hands.' is vague and lacks a clear verb-resource pair. It hints at claiming an artifact but does not explicitly state the action, making it hard for an agent to understand what the tool does.
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 on when to use this tool versus siblings like 'give_artifact' or 'take_artifact'. The description does not provide context for appropriate use cases.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.