viridisos__viridis_certify_envelope

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

The description provides some behavioral context by noting it is a 'staging preview; non-authoritative until the K3 swap.' However, it is ambiguous whether side effects like binding DIDs and pricing toll are part of this tool's action. No information about safety or 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?

The description is excessively long and includes bracketed text that appears to be a general system introduction, not directly relevant to this specific tool. It is not front-loaded with the core action.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and 3 undocumented required parameters, the description is highly incomplete. It does not explain input meaning, expected output, or error conditions, leaving the agent with insufficient information to use the tool correctly.

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?

The input schema has 3 required parameters with 0% description coverage. The description does not define or explain 'module_id', 'subject', or 'inputs', adding no semantic 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 states that the tool certifies a parcel against a theorem and returns a 'Certified by ViridisOS' mark envelope. However, it is mixed with general ViridisOS system description and mentions binding DIDs and pricing toll, which muddles the specific tool purpose. It does not clearly distinguish from the sibling tool viridis_certify.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like viridis_certify or viridis_verify_mark. The description does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or context.

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