ubos_store_call

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so well: it discloses the pay-per-call cost model, 402 failure behavior, exact payment instructions (USDC on Solana, wallet, memo = api_key), ~15s credit delay, and retry. It also exposes the payload contract for both products.

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 compact and information-dense; every sentence earns its place. It front-loads the core purpose, then payment behavior, then product payloads, with no filler.

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 and no output schema, the description covers the essential invocation and payment workflow. It is slightly incomplete about what governor/hotvessel actually return and what a successful response looks like, but the important call/payment semantics are present.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds real value by explaining that api_key is an arbitrary agent identity/payment memo and by giving concrete payload examples for governor (action) and hotvessel (prompt), which the schema alone does not provide.

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 opens with a clear verb+resource: 'Call a UBOS x402 metered tool, pay-per-call,' and gives concrete product examples (governor, hotvessel). It does not explicitly contrast itself with sibling tools, but the pay-per-call framing and payload examples make its role distinct.

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?

It communicates the usage context (use when you need to call a metered product and are willing to pay per call) and the retry flow after payment. However, it gives no explicit when-not-to-use guidance and does not mention sibling alternatives such as ubos_store_products or kinematic_* tools.

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