generate_share_card

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals the output size, content (market odds, optional position data, affiliate branding), and that it returns a URL. It does not mention error conditions, rate limits, or potential side effects, leaving some transparency gaps for a read-only generator.

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 two sentences long, with the first stating the purpose and output, and the second adding usage scenarios. Every sentence contributes value without redundancy.

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 description adequately covers purpose, output format, and use cases, given the simple nature of the tool. It lacks details on error handling or URL behavior, but this is minor for a static image URL generator. The 100% parameter schema coverage helps compensate for the absent output schema.

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 100% with each parameter clearly described (e.g., 'Market public key (Solana PDA)'). The description adds some context by linking params to card content (affiliate branding, position data), but it doesn't go beyond the schema. Baseline 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 'Generate a share card image URL for a market' and specifies the output format 'PNG URL (1200x630)'. It also distinguishes this tool from sibling transaction builders by focusing on image generation for social media, making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

Explicit usage context is provided: 'Use this to create viral social media posts — embed the image in tweets, Telegram messages, AgentBook posts, or Discord embeds.' However, it does not mention when not to use the tool or name alternatives, so it falls short of a perfect score.

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