Rustchain Lottery Eligibility

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Check' implies a non-mutating read operation, which is useful, but the description does not clarify what 'eligible' means, whether it queries live chain state, or what happens for invalid or inactive miners. The output schema likely covers return shape, so a moderate score is warranted.

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, clear sentence with no filler. It states the action and the target resource effectively, earning its place 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?

For a one-parameter, single-purpose tool with an output schema present, the description is nearly complete. It lacks usage guidance and behavioral nuance, but the simple scope, fully documented parameter, and output schema reduce the need for additional prose.

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%, and the description adds no meaning beyond the schema. The schema already documents miner_id as 'The miner wallet address to check eligibility for.' The description does not compensate further, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 names a specific verb and resource: 'Check if a miner is eligible for epoch lottery rewards.' This is clear and identifies the exact operation without confusing it with other rustchain tools, though it does not explicitly distinguish it from siblings like rustchain_epoch or rustchain_miners.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as rustchain_epoch or rustchain_stats. The description implies a narrow use case, but an agent receives no explicit context, prerequisites, or exclusion criteria.

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