Register SNS Domain

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds the return format ({ txid, inscriptionId, domain }), which provides some behavioral transparency, but it does not mention side effects like on-chain transactions or fund spending beyond what annotations already signal.

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 concise, front-loaded, and includes clearly labeled Args and Returns sections. The only minor detractor is the inaccurate fee default, which is a semantic issue, not a structural one.

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?

The description gives parameters and a return shape, but it lacks essential context for a registration tool: prerequisites (e.g., wallet setup), on-chain effects, and a clear differentiation from other registration tools. No output schema exists, so the return info is helpful but insufficient for full completeness.

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 the baseline is 3. However, the description incorrectly states the default for feePerByte (0.2) while the schema says 0.15. This actively misleads, so the score is lowered to 2.

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 states a specific verb ('registration') and resource ('SNS domain'), for example '.sats, .btc, etc.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like ordnet_domain_register and ordnet_domain_register_opns.

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?

The description implies usage for SNS domain registration via the title and text, but there is no explicit statement of when to use this tool over alternatives. No exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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