Bounty Search

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses the underlying mechanism ('Queries GitHub Issues labeled bounty') and adds important reward caveats: RTC is paid at an internal reference rate, not a market price, and is not offered for sale. It does not explicitly state 'read-only', but 'queries' strongly implies a non-mutating operation.

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 three sentences, each earning its place: purpose, mechanism, and a caveat about reward interpretation. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, and contains no filler.

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 that all parameters are fully described in the schema and an output schema exists, the description provides the missing context: the GitHub Issues source, the 'bounty' label, the repo scope, and the RTC reward caveat. Nothing essential appears to be missing for an agent to call the tool correctly.

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 parameter baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-specific semantics beyond what the schema already states; it merely summarizes that search can be by keyword, amount, or difficulty, which overlaps with the 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?

The description states a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('open RustChain and BoTTube bounties'), including filter dimensions (keyword, amount, difficulty). It is clear and distinguishes the tool from general BoTTube content search by focusing on bounties, though it does not explicitly name alternatives or state what it is not.

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 context is clear: use this tool when searching for open bounties in the named repositories, with optional filters. It does not mention exclusions or alternative tools, but the search-oriented purpose and repository scope give sufficient practical guidance.

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