create_access_receipt

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

No annotations provided, and description fails to disclose side effects such as whether the receipt is stored locally, transmitted, or requires external verification. The cryptographic signing process is implied but not elaborated, leaving behavioral expectations unclear.

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 concise sentences front-load key information. Every word adds value, no 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?

Missing output schema and clear explanation of the return value (the signed receipt format). For a cryptographic tool, details on key usage, storage, and verification needed for completeness are absent.

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?

Input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so baseline is 3. The description adds minimal value beyond schema, only framing the purpose of the receipt without enriching parameter understanding (e.g., what 'block' JSON represents).

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?

Description clearly states the tool creates a signed access receipt for cryptographic proof of content consumption under specific terms. It distinguishes from siblings like 'create_decision_lineage_receipt' by specifying the receipt type and purpose.

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 alternatives (e.g., other receipt creation tools). Lacks context on prerequisites, typical workflow, or scenarios where this tool is appropriate.

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