marketplace_create_or_update_stall

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

Describes replaceability behavior via parameterized-replaceable identifier and mentions the safety pipeline (read-only, signer, rate limit, optional confirm). With no annotations, this provides adequate transparency for a mutation tool.

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?

Three concise sentences: core purpose, replaceability detail, and UI/safety pipeline. No wasted words, front-loaded with essential information.

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 5-parameter tool with full schema coverage, the description covers replaceability and safety. No output schema is needed, but return values or errors are not mentioned. Sibling tools are distinct, so no confusion.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds minor value (e.g., 'id replaces prior stall', 'Shopstr also accepts ISO 4217') but does not significantly enhance understanding beyond 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?

Clearly states 'Create or update a NIP-15 marketplace stall (kind:30017)', using specific verb and resource. Distinguishes from sibling tools like marketplace_create_or_update_product by focusing on stalls.

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?

Mentions Shopstr as canonical UI, implying usage context, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like creating a product or listing stalls.

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