build_register_affiliate_transaction

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It notes that the transaction is 'unsigned', implying a preparatory step, but does not explain what the output is, whether it needs signing or submission, or any side effects. The 'REQUIRES BAOZI_LIVE=1' flag adds some context, but overall the behavioral disclosure is minimal.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the critical requirement and clearly states the action. It contains no filler or redundant information, achieving high efficiency and readability.

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 is simple (2 params, no output schema) but the description remains incomplete for an agent. It does not explain what the 'unsigned transaction' output looks like, how to use it afterward, or any associated requirements beyond BAOZI_LIVE=1. Since no output schema exists, the description should compensate by describing the return value or next steps, which it fails to do.

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%, with both parameters (code and user_wallet) including descriptive text. The tool description itself adds no extra parameter semantics beyond the schema, but since the schema already documents the parameters clearly, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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's function: 'Build unsigned transaction to register as an affiliate with a unique code.' This is a specific verb+resource combination that distinguishes it from sibling tools like build_claim_affiliate_transaction or build_toggle_affiliate_transaction. The purpose is unambiguous and well-scoped.

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 includes a prerequisite 'REQUIRES BAOZI_LIVE=1', which gives some usage context by indicating an environment requirement. However, it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this tool over alternatives, nor does it offer exclusions or conditions. Usage is largely implied by the tool's name and purpose rather than stated.

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