create_charter

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates the tool creates a charter defining offices, amendment rules, and dissolution policy, but it omits critical side effects: permission requirements, irreversibility, the use of founder private keys, or what the caller should expect after creation.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the action, and contains no filler. It efficiently communicates the core purpose and scope.

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 8 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too sparse to cover the tool's complexity. It does not mention return values, follow-up flows like verification or signing, or the consequences of creating a charter, leaving 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 75%, so most parameters already have descriptions. The description adds some meaning by mapping 'offices, amendment rules, dissolution policy' to relevant parameters (offices, amendment_board_keys, amendment_required_sigs, dissolution_grace_seconds), but it does not explain the relationship between amendment_board_keys and amendment_required_sigs or how founder keys are used.

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 uses the specific verb 'Create' with the resource 'new institutional charter' and clarifies it as 'the constitutional root of an organization.' This clearly differentiates it from siblings like verify_charter and sign_charter, which perform different operations on charters.

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 phrase 'Create a new institutional charter' and 'constitutional root of an organization' clearly implies use when establishing a new organization or governance structure. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, such as using verify_charter for verification or sign_charter for signing.

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