marketplace_register_tool

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It mentions defining pricing and revenue splits, but omits critical details such as whether registration is on-chain, requires wallet signing, is reversible, or incurs fees. It also does not state what happens after registration (e.g., tool becomes immediately discoverable) or any side effects.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary action ('Register a new AI tool'). There is no filler or redundancy; every word contributes to the core purpose and key capabilities.

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?

This is a complex registration tool with 12 parameters, 8 required, no output schema, and no annotations. The description does not explain prerequisites, expected return values (e.g., tool ID or transaction hash), uniqueness constraints on the tool name, or validation rules like revenue splits summing to 100%. The schema provides parameter semantics but not tool-level context, making the description insufficient for a safe and correct invocation.

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 the schema already explains all parameters. The description adds only high-level context like 'define pricing, revenue splits' which repeats schema descriptions without adding syntax, constraints, or relationships between parameters (e.g., revenueSplit percentages must total 100%). 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?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Register a new AI tool in the decentralized marketplace.' The verb 'register' and resource 'AI tool' are specific, and the mention of 'new' distinguishes this from sibling tools like marketplace_update_tool or marketplace_pause_tool.

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?

The description implies usage for registering new tools by saying 'new AI tool,' but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or recommend alternatives like marketplace_update_tool for existing tools or marketplace_discover_tools for browsing. The context is helpful but lacks explicit exclusion or alternative guidance.

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