preorder_bns_name

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the two-step state dependency, the ~10 minute confirmation wait (latency), and that a salt is returned and must be persisted. It omits cost/fee implications and any wallet/network prerequisites, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose and the routing NOTE, and the workflow steps follow in execution order. The trailing promotional "Tip: call earning_opportunities" is unrelated to preordering and does not earn 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 two-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description supplies the essentials an agent needs: the return value that must be saved, the wait period, and the next call. It never mentions checking availability or price first (check_bns_availability, get_bns_price), which is a real gap in a registration workflow.

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 coverage is 100%, so a baseline of 3 applies, but the description adds real meaning beyond the schema: the salt returned here must be reused verbatim in register_bns_name, which explains why the optional salt parameter matters across calls. The name parameter semantics are left entirely to the schema.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ("Preorder a BNS domain name") and immediately frames it as step 1 of a 2-step registration. It explicitly names the sibling it is not (claim_bns_name_fast) and the follow-up tool (register_bns_name), so an agent can distinguish it from the other BNS tools in the sibling list without opening schemas.

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 explicit when-to-use and when-not-to-use: prefer claim_bns_name_fast for .btc names, use this flow only for non-.btc namespaces or when claim-fast is unavailable. It also spells out the sequencing condition (wait ~10 minutes for confirmation, then call register_bns_name with the same salt).

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