steward_directory

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly states the tool is free, read-only, and never signs or spends, which directly addresses the most critical safety concern. However, it does not mention authentication requirements, rate limits, or pagination behavior, leaving some gaps.

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 tightly written and front-loaded: it begins with what the directory is, then its ranking policy, then the sibling distinction, then return format and safety notes. Every sentence earns its place with no 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?

Given a zero-parameter, read-only listing with no output schema, the description provides all necessary context: what it returns, its scope, the alternative sibling tool, and its safety profile. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4 per the scoring rules. The description does not need to explain parameter meanings and appropriately does not include any.

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?

States a specific resource (the Steward Standard merchant directory) and scope (57 x402 merchants ranked by public merit score), and explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling steward_catalog ('for WHAT Brian Booms sells use steward_catalog'). An agent can immediately tell what this tool returns and how it differs from the product catalog.

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?

Explicitly describes when to use this tool versus the alternative: it lists WHO sells (merchants) while steward_catalog lists WHAT is sold. Also notes it returns the full machine-readable directory and is free/read-only, giving clear context for invocation.

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