build_extend_race_market_transaction

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses admin-only access, BAOZI_LIVE requirement, and 'Build transaction' implies it constructs rather than executes. It stops short of explaining side effects or return behavior but provides meaningful behavioral context.

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 concise (two sentences) and front-loaded with the critical constraints. Every piece of information earns its place, with no redundancy or filler.

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?

The tool has moderate complexity with 4 parameters and no output schema. The description includes key access constraints and the 'build transaction' nature. It lacks detail about optional parameters or post-build steps but is adequate given schema richness.

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% for all 4 parameters, so the schema already documents each parameter. The description adds no extra semantic meaning beyond what the schema provides, matching the baseline for high 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?

The description states a specific verb ('Build transaction') and resource ('race market deadline'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like build_extend_market_transaction. The purpose is unambiguous and specific.

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 provides important context: ADMIN ONLY and requires BAOZI_LIVE=1, plus protocol admin signature. However, it doesn't explicitly mention when to prefer this over non-race alternatives or give exclusion criteria; usage is implied by the tool name.

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