build

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It details the auto-approval of CPU cost, on-chain payment, confirmation wait, indexer delay, and automatic mining start for extractors. This thoroughly discloses behavioral traits beyond basic functionality.

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 paragraph of 5-6 sentences, each contributing useful information. While not overly verbose, it could be more structured (e.g., bullet points for types). Still efficient and front-loaded with the core purpose.

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?

Covers prerequisites, types, parameters, behavioral details (cost, auto-approve, delay), and post-actions. Lacks error cases or conditions not met, but sufficient for an agent to invoke correctly given the input schema and sibling tools for inspection.

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%, providing baseline 3. The description adds value by explaining the two building types and their parameter requirements (e.g., targetResourceId must be null for hub, and for extractor it must be a resource with active deposit). This goes beyond the schema's brief descriptions.

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: 'Place a building on a revealed Land cell you own.' It distinguishes between extractor and hub building types, differentiating it from sibling tools that handle other actions like authenticate or get_cell.

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?

Provides explicit context: requires session (authenticate first), explains when to use extractor vs hub, gives conditions for targetResourceId, and suggests post-build actions like get_mining_status and get_cell. No explicit when-not-to-use, but sufficient guidance.

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