publishSoftwareAnnounce

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions publishing NIP-82 events and the need for an ok:true + hashed APK payload, but doesn't disclose side effects like network writes, signing with privkey, failure behavior, or return values. For a publish operation with zero annotation support, this is insufficient.

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, entirely front-loaded, no wasted words. The first sentence delivers the core behavior, the second provides clear prioritization guidance.

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?

With 11 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is far too terse. It doesn't explain return values, error conditions, or the meaning of most parameters. It does provide some context about being low-level, but that alone doesn't make the tool safely invocable.

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 only 9% (only 'forge' has a description). The description adds a minimal hint about the forge payload (ok:true + hashed APK) but says nothing about the other 10 parameters including the required 'privkey'. It does not compensate for the low schema coverage.

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 publishes NIP-82 events from an already-fetched forge payload, naming the specific protocol and prerequisite. It distinguishes itself from sibling announceSoftwareFromForgeRelease by labeling itself 'Low-level' and directing users to prefer the alternative.

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?

Explicitly says 'Low-level' and 'Prefer announceSoftwareFromForgeRelease', giving clear when-to-use vs alternative guidance. Also implies prerequisite of having an already-fetched forge payload from fetchForgeReleases.

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