iota_move_publish_unsigned

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions the transaction is 'unsigned' and for 'agent wallet signing', but lacks details on behavioral traits like error conditions, side effects (e.g., if it validates the package), or typical output format. This is inadequate for a tool that generates transactions.

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or unnecessary elaboration.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the tool returns (e.g., transaction bytes, metadata), error behaviors, or dependencies (e.g., requires a built package). For a transaction-generation tool, this leaves significant gaps for an agent.

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 schema fully documents both parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what's in the schema (e.g., no clarification on path format or gas budget implications). Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 clearly states the specific action ('Generate an unsigned publish transaction') and resource ('for a Move package'), with additional context about its purpose ('for agent wallet signing'). It distinguishes from siblings like iota_move_build (which likely compiles) or iota_wallet_sign_execute (which likely signs/executes).

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 when preparing a Move package for signing by an agent wallet, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this vs. alternatives like iota_move_build (for compilation) or iota_transaction (for other transaction types). No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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