transport

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

No annotations are provided, so the description fully shoulders the behavioral disclosure. It reveals: auto-approves CPU spend, submits and waits for on-chain payment, returns jobId, escrows resource on payment failure, and rejects duplicate transport while pending. No contradictions or omissions.

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?

A single, well-organized paragraph that front-loads the purpose. Every sentence serves a distinct function: purpose, prerequisite, cost logic, preview recommendation, return value, failure handling, and concurrency rule. No 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?

Despite 3 required params and no output schema, the description thoroughly covers what a caller needs: prerequisites, cost behavior, return value, error recovery, and concurrency constraints. It references sibling tools for preview and status tracking, making the tool self-contained in context.

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 a baseline of 3. The description adds value by explaining path constraints ('each hop must be within reach'), resourceId requirement ('must have a balance at the source cell'), and amount format ('positive integer string'). This supplements the schema without redundancy.

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 starts with a clear verb+resource: 'Move a resource between cells along a waypoint chain.' It distinguishes this from sibling tools by referencing related ones like quote_transport, get_transport_status, and resume_transport. The action and resource are unmistakable.

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 prerequisites: 'Requires a session — call authenticate first.' Explains when to use vs. alternatives: 'Preview the cost first with quote_transport.' Covers error recovery: 'If the on-chain payment fails... resumable with resume_transport.' And states when not to use: 'While that paid shipment is still pending, starting another transport... is rejected.'

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