news_claim_beat

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the full burden and discharges it: it discloses the backend is gone (410 Gone), that governance has migrated on-chain, and warns against invocation. Failure mode and replacement path are both disclosed.

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?

Deprecation is front-loaded with a visual stop marker, which is exactly right for the highest-priority information. The closing tip about earning_opportunities is tangential to the deprecated tool but serves as a useful redirect, so it does not badly dilute the message.

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 deprecated zero-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, nothing further is needed: the description says what it was, why it fails, and where to go instead. There is no residual ambiguity an agent could act on.

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?

The schema has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4; there is nothing for the description to clarify. It correctly implies the tool takes no input by describing it purely as a former claim/join action.

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?

Opens with an unmistakable deprecation marker and states exactly what the tool used to do (claim/join a beat via the aibtc.news API). An agent immediately knows both the resource and that it must not be called, which is the most useful possible outcome for a dead tool.

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?

Provides explicit when-not-to-use guidance ('do not use'), explains the reason (API shut down, 410 Gone), and names two concrete alternatives with an entry point: legion_contribute, starting from legion_status. This is the strongest possible routing guidance.

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