MolTrust

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

Adds critical behavioral context absent from annotations: Base L2 anchoring mechanism, EU AI Act Article 50(2) compliance, and credential contents (provenance, rights).

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?

Well-structured with front-loaded action statement followed by Args section; length is justified by parameter count and regulatory complexity, though Args format is slightly verbose.

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?

Thoroughly covers the domain (W3C VC standard, blockchain anchoring, compliance, all parameters) without needing to explain output values since output schema exists.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, comprehensively compensates by documenting all 8 parameters with semantic meaning and concrete examples (e.g., 'Suno API v3.2', 'CC-BY').

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?

Explicitly states it issues (not verifies) a VerifiedMusicCredential for AI-generated music, distinguishing clearly from sibling mt_verify_music_credential via specific verb and scope.

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 context (AI-generated tracks, EU AI Act compliance) but lacks explicit when-to-use guidance versus verification or alternative credential workflows.

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