MolTrust

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden; successfully discloses cryptographic signing method (Ed25519/JWS) and specific credential payload contents beyond generic 'issue credential'.

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?

Compact, front-loaded with action statement followed by technical details and parameter specification; no redundant text, 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?

Given output schema exists, description appropriately focuses on credential contents and signing rather than return values; covers necessary behavioral context for a complex VC issuance operation.

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 has 0% description coverage; description compensates effectively by specifying address format (Base EVM, 0x...), adding necessary semantic context missing from structured 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?

Specific verb 'Issue' with clear resource 'AgentTrustCredential' and distinguishes from siblings via specific credential type and content details (trust score, Sybil, ERC-8004).

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 implied usage via content description (use when needing those specific claims), but lacks explicit when/when-not guidance regarding sibling issue tools like moltrust_credential or mt_issue_badge.

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