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

Describes key behaviors: sends verification code, requires accept_terms confirmation, and outlines legal implications by referencing specific terms sections. No annotations provided, so description carries the burden and does it well, though lacks mentions of rate limits or error handling.

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?

Description is well-structured with a clear purpose, parameter explanations, and an example. No unnecessary sentences every part adds value.

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 tool purpose, parameters, and next steps. Given that an output schema exists, it's not required to explain return values. Lacks information on error cases or prerequisites, but sufficient for a registration tool.

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?

Even though schema description coverage is 0%, the description explains each parameter in detail: email, organization_name, and accept_terms with the requirement to be true and its legal significance. Includes a usage example demonstrating parameter usage.

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?

Clearly states the tool registers for an Ohmyfin API key to use paid tools, describes the flow (creates account sends verification code), and distinguishes from sibling mcp_verify by indicating the next step.

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 clear context for when to use (registration step for API key) and what to do next (call mcp_verify). Doesn't explicitly state when not to use, but implicitly suggests it's for new users only.

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