submit_listing

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

No annotations exist, so description carries full burden. It discloses cost implications but omits side effects, permissions, or post-submission behavior. Adds some value but limited.

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 purpose and requirements. Efficient and scannable.

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 submission tool with no output schema, missing details on confirmation, duplicates, or next steps. Cost info is helpful but leaves gaps.

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 50% with two descriptions. The tool description merely repeats that the listed parameters are required, adding no extra semantics for the undocumented 'entity' and 'contact_email' parameters.

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?

The description clearly states the tool submits a listing to a BCA directory with specific examples (vcs, aggregators, trading-bots), and lists required fields. This distinguishes it from siblings like list_vcs which are read-only views.

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?

It specifies required fields (listing_name, directory, entity, contact_email) and cost model ('Free to call, paid to feature'), giving practical usage context. However, it does not explicitly compare to alternatives.

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