signNostrEvent

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only says 'Sign', which implies a cryptographic operation, but no details about effects (e.g., event mutation vs. returning signed event), safety, or required permissions. With zero annotation coverage, this is insufficient.

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 a single short sentence, which is concise and front-loaded. However, it is perhaps too concise for a critical operation like signing, missing important context. Still, it avoids fluff.

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 the complexity of Nostr event signing and the absence of an output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the signing process, return format, or how it differs from similar tools like signNote. The tool is part of a rich family, but this description is too bare.

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% and includes descriptions for both parameters (privateKey has a good description). The unsignedEvent parameter description is minimal ('Unsigned event template'), but the schema already defines its structure. The tool description adds no extra semantics, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description states 'Sign any unsigned Nostr event', which clearly identifies the action and resource. However, it doesn't elaborate on the signing process or output, but the purpose is distinct from siblings like create or publish.

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 usage guidance is provided. No mention of when to use this tool versus alternatives like signNote, or any prerequisites (e.g., private key requirements or bunker setup). The description is too brief to guide proper selection.

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