trust_identity

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses behavioral traits: resolves delivery block, trusts specific or all known keys, and security implications. No contradictions.

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 well-structured and each sentence adds value. Could be slightly more concise, but no redundancy. Front-loaded with purpose and usage.

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 output schema, the description explains the effect adequately. References sibling tool list_identities, and covers prerequisites. Does not explain return values or error scenarios, but sufficient for the tool's complexity.

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 with descriptions, but the tool description adds meaningful context: explaining the difference between providing a safety_number vs leaving it blank, and the security trade-off. 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?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: trusting a Signal identity key after out-of-band verification. It distinguishes from siblings by referencing list_identities for inspection, and explains the context of safety numbers and encryption.

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 indicates when to use (Signal blocks delivery with untrusted identity errors) and when not to use (without verifying the safety number). Suggests using list_identities first, and warns against trusting unverified keys.

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