agent_corroborate

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

No annotations provided; description only states that a signed vote builds consensus, but does not disclose potential side effects, irreversibility, or expected outcomes beyond the vote.

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?

Two concise sentences front-load the core action and purpose without extraneous information.

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?

The tool is simple, but the description lacks information about return values or confirmation of vote submission; no output schema is provided.

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 has 100% coverage of parameters; description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema's field descriptions (e.g., vote values, signature format).

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?

Description explicitly states verb 'corroborate or refute' and resource 'attestation', and mentions decentralized consensus, clearly differentiating from sibling tools like agent_get_attestation or agent_get_consensus.

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?

Implied usage for voting on another agent's attestation, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as agent_create_attestation or agent_get_consensus.

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