MolTrust

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

No annotations provided and description lacks disclosure of side effects, persistence model, or authentication requirements beyond the basic action types.

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?

Efficiently organized with clear purpose statement followed by Args documentation; every sentence conveys necessary information without redundancy.

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?

Adequate for basic invocation given output schema exists, but incomplete regarding tool selection rationale in context of specialized siblings and missing behavioral side effects.

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?

Excellent compensation for 0% schema description coverage by providing detailed semantics, conditional requirements, and defaults for all four parameters (e.g., credential_type default, JSON string format for credential).

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 specific actions (issue/verify) and resource (W3C Verifiable Credential) clearly, but fails to distinguish from specialized sibling tools 'moltguard_credential_issue' and 'moltguard_credential_verify'.

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 through conditional parameter requirements (e.g., subject_did only for 'issue'), but lacks explicit guidance on when to choose this combined tool over the separate issue/verify sibling tools.

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