agirails_publish_config

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

Description claims the tool returns a snippet (implying read-only operation), but readOnlyHint=false suggests potential side effects. This contradiction misleads the agent about the tool's true behavior.

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, front-loaded with the core action. No unnecessary words, though an explicit statement of output type would improve structure.

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?

Provides context about the outcome of running the generated code, but lacks parameter explanations, error scenarios, or any detail about the snippet's behavior. Particularly incomplete given the annotation contradiction.

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?

Both parameters are documented in the schema, but with 0% schema description coverage, the description should explain their purpose. It only mentions AGIRAILS.md as the default configPath but doesn't clarify configPath or network parameter semantics.

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 states the tool returns a TypeScript snippet for publishing AGIRAILS.md to IPFS and registering on-chain. Distinguishes from sibling tools like agirails_find_agents or agirails_get_balance which serve different purposes.

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?

Implicitly indicates usage for making an agent publicly discoverable, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives or prerequisites. No mention of when not to use.

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