surety__release_bond

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses the release action and the constraint of no open claims. Lacks details on side effects (e.g., what happens to the bond after release) but the core behavior is clear.

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?

Single sentence with a parenthetical context, no fluff. Front-loaded with the action and condition. Every word serves a purpose.

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 should clarify return value or confirmation. It does not. However, the tool is simple (one param) and the description covers the essential constraints, so it's minimally complete but missing post-release behavior.

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 0%, so description must compensate for parameter meaning. The single parameter 'bond_id' is not explained at all in the description; no guidance on format or how to obtain it. The description adds no value beyond the 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 action ('Release the remaining stake') and the condition ('after the coverage window elapses'). It differentiates from sibling tools like filing a claim or slashing a bond by focusing on release. However, it assumes domain knowledge of terms like 'stake' and 'principal'.

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 ('after coverage window elapses') and when not ('refused while any claim is still open'). Provides clear preconditions without needing to consult other tools.

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