aps_construct_attribution_primitive

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

The description discloses that the tool builds and signs an object and returns it, but with no annotations, it lacks details on side effects like storage or permissions, which is adequate but not thorough for a tool with no annotations.

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 sentences, front-loading the core action and supplementing with axis details and output; every part earns its place.

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 tool with nested parameters and no output schema, the description covers the purpose, axes, and return value, though it omits output structure and detail on issuer/private key usage.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, the description adds context by explaining the axes and output, but the schema already describes parameters; the addition is helpful but not critical.

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 'Build and sign a four-axis AttributionPrimitive' and specifies the four axes, making the purpose explicit and distinct from sibling tools.

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 for constructing attribution primitives but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like aps_verify_attribution_primitive or aps_create_attribution_receipt.

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