Verify a ForceDream proof

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

Fully discloses that verification is local, uses Ed25519 math, and does not contact ForceDream. No annotations exist, so the description carries the burden and meets it well.

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?

Three concise sentences, front-loaded with purpose. No redundant information.

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?

Covers purpose, inputs, and verification mechanism. Lacks mention of output format (e.g., returns boolean or proof details), but absence of output schema reduces expectation. Still adequate for a simple verification tool.

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 has 100% coverage, and description adds meaning by explaining the fetch vs direct verify distinction and optionality. Adds value beyond schema.

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?

Clearly states the verb 'verify' and the resource 'ForceDream agent proof', specifying the use of public-key cryptography. Purpose is distinct from sibling tools 'invoke_agent' and 'search_agents'.

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?

Describes two ways to provide input (task_id or proof object) and clarifies local execution with no account needed. Implicitly guides usage but lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives beyond context.

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