claim_poop

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It states the action but does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether it is a transaction (gas fees, irreversible), if it requires approvals, or what happens on failure. Minimal transparency.

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 no unnecessary words. Front-loaded with the verb and resource. Highly concise and clear.

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?

For a simple claim action with one parameter, the description covers the basic purpose but lacks behavioral context (e.g., transaction implications, success/failure responses). No output schema, so return values are not explained. Adequate but not complete for an AI agent.

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 one parameter with a clear description ('Array of baseling token IDs to claim for'). Schema description coverage is 100%, so description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3.

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 action ('Claim pending POOP rewards') and the target resource ('your baselings'), with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_pending_poop' which is a read operation.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when there are pending rewards, prerequisites like having baselings with unclaimed POOP, or that it should be used after checking pending rewards). Only implied usage.

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