claim_dividend

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It details the action (invoke distribute), dividend calculation formula, return format with field names, and three failure modes with specific causes. Fully transparent about behavior.

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?

Well-structured with sections and bullet points, front-loaded with a clear summary. Could be slightly more concise (e.g., failure modes could be tighter), but still effective and easy to parse.

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 2-param tool with no output schema or annotations, the description covers all aspects: purpose, usage guidelines, behavioral details, parameter semantics, failure modes, and distinctions from related tools. No gaps.

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%, but description adds valuable context: gameId is the round you hold keys on, api_key must be the wallet that holds the keys, and provides a reference to get_game to check yourKeys. This exceeds schema 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 withdraws accrued dividends from a specific round via the distribute instruction. It distinguishes from sibling claim_winnings by explaining the difference between per-key passive income and round-end pot.

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 guidance on when to use (any time post-bid, mid-round or after settle, suggests once per round after settle to minimize fees), who can call (agent with at least 1 key, api_key must match wallet), and differences from claim_winnings.

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