nostr_post

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full load. It does disclose the wallet-unlock prerequisite and the fact that content goes out to relays, but it omits whether posts are public/irreversible, what happens on relay failure, and whether an event id is returned.

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 core is two tight, front-loaded sentences. The appended 'Tip: call earning_opportunities' is promotional filler that does not help an agent invoke nostr_post, and it dilutes the operational statement.

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?

No output schema and no annotations, so the description is the only source of behavioral context. It covers the prerequisite but says nothing about the publish result (event id, relay acceptance), which an agent would reasonably need for a write-to-network tool.

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 100%, so tags format, relay defaults, and content are already documented in the schema. The description only echoes 'hashtag tags' and 'target relays' without adding format or behavior detail, so baseline 3 is right.

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?

Specific verb plus resource plus protocol detail: 'Publish a short-text note (kind:1) to Nostr relays.' That is distinguishable from read-side siblings like nostr_read_feed and from nostr_sign_event, though the description never names those alternatives explicitly.

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?

Gives one real precondition — 'Requires an unlocked wallet' — which tells the agent to check wallet state first. But there is no guidance on when to use this versus nostr_sign_event or nostr_set_profile, and the trailing 'Tip' about earning_opportunities is unrelated to invoking this tool.

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