create_bounty

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

No annotations provided. Description adds behavioral context: 'Signs and broadcasts an on-chain transaction' and 'Returns the bounty ID.' This is valuable but lacks details on side effects (e.g., gas costs, permissions).

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?

Description is concise (two sentences), front-loads purpose, and lists parameters efficiently. No superfluous words.

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 no annotations, low schema coverage, and no output schema, the description covers purpose, parameter formats, and return value. It adequately prepares the agent for a blockchain transaction tool, though could mention transaction requirements.

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 0%, so description compensates by explaining required and optional parameters: owner, name, issue_iid, amount (array of {denom, amount} coins, amount as string), and optional expiry (unix timestamp). Adds meaning beyond raw schema, especially for the nested amount object.

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?

Description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'incentivize work on an issue by attaching a reward.' It uses specific verb (create) and resource (bounty), and distinguishes from siblings by mentioning list_bounties, get_bounty, update_bounty.

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 states when to use: 'when you want to incentivize work on an issue.' References alternative tools with 'See also:' list, providing guidance. Does not explicitly state when not to use, but context is clear.

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