mojomo_share

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden and does well: it discloses that nothing is sent automatically (you deliver it), that the return is a referral-code link, and that MOJOMO_AGENT_KEY is required. It omits rate limits or permission tiers but covers the critical surprising behavior.

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, front-loaded with what it does and the key caveat that you must deliver the link yourself. No padding.

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 6-param tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description explains the return value and auth requirement adequately. Minor gaps like delivery expectations or failure modes remain but are not critical.

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 all six parameters are already documented in the schema. The description adds little param-level detail beyond implying audience/subject scope, so baseline 3 applies.

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 (share) plus the resources (platform, offer, or campaign) and notes the return value (a link with a referral code). It distinguishes itself from siblings like mojomo_notify_human by framing the action as sharing with a human or another agent rather than notifying.

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 this when you have decided something here is worth someone else's attention" gives clear situational context. It also signals the tool does not deliver anything for you, which shapes correct usage, though it does not explicitly name notify_human as the alternative.

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