build_create_race_whitelist_transaction

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It mentions a prerequisite (BAOZI_LIVE=1) and implies a transaction-building side effect, but it does not explain whether the whitelist creation overwrites existing data, requires authorization, or has any mutable impact beyond building the transaction.

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 description is a single, concise sentence that front-loads the requirement and states the action clearly. It contains no redundant information, earning full marks for conciseness.

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?

Given the simplicity of the tool, the description is terse but leaves critical gaps. It does not clarify what 'create whitelist' entails (e.g., whether it initializes a fresh whitelist or modifies an existing one), nor does it explain the distinction from the sibling add-to-whitelist tools. The absence of an output schema or description of return value further reduces completeness.

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 input schema provides clear descriptions for both parameters ('Race market public key' and 'Market creator wallet'), giving 100% coverage. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 builds a transaction to create a whitelist for a private race market, using a specific verb ('build') and resource ('whitelist for private race market'). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like build_add_to_race_whitelist_transaction, leaving some ambiguity about what 'create' means in contrast to 'add'.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many sibling whitelist-related tools. The only contextual hint is the prerequisite '[REQUIRES BAOZI_LIVE=1]', but it does not address selection criteria or exclusions, making it hard for an agent to choose this tool over alternatives.

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