create_chained_governance_block

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It states the provenance-preservation aspect but omits side effects like signing, validation of parent block, or failure modes. The short phrase 'Preserves the chain of provenance' adds some context but is insufficient for a creation tool with key inputs.

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?

Two sentences, zero filler. The core purpose and a key property are stated efficiently.

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?

With 7 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description leaves major gaps: no return value description, no explanation of how parentBlock is used, no mention of key requirements, and no error handling context. It is insufficient for an agent to confidently invoke this 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 covers 71% of parameters, but the description does not elaborate on key format, derivation type values, or the meaning of training/inference enums. The only indirect hint is 'references the original publisher's block' relating to parentBlock, but no specific parameter-level guidance.

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?

Clearly identifies the action (create) and resource (chained governance block for derivative content). The phrase 'references the original publisher's block' distinguishes it from generic block creation tools like generate_governance_block.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like generate_governance_block or create_derivation_receipt. Missing context about prerequisites (e.g., must have parent block, valid keys) or when chaining is required.

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