claim_mining

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the action is off-chain and free, and explains edge cases (no-op and error). Could be more explicit about success behavior, but sufficiently transparent for a simple claim action.

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?

Four concise sentences, each adding value. Front-loaded with main purpose. No unnecessary words.

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 simplicity of the tool (1 parameter, no output schema), the description covers purpose, prerequisites, edge cases, and related tools. Could mention post-claim balance update, but overall complete.

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 already fully covers the parameter semantics. The description adds context about session and off-chain, but does not enhance parameter meaning. Baseline 3 is appropriate given 100% coverage.

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 uses a specific verb 'bank' and clearly identifies the resource (accrued resources from an extractor on a cell). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_mining_status, making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: requires a session, off-chain, no transaction, and mentions prerequisites (active extractor). Provides caveats: no-op if nothing accrued, error if no extractor, and advises checking get_mining_status first.

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