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

Annotations already declare this is a non-read-only, closed-world operation, and the description adds substantial context: rate limiting per address, no key required, returned apiKey scope ('read + exam, sandbox only'), claimCode for a person, and the instruction to pass apiKey in every later call. These are meaningful behavioral details beyond the annotations.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the critical sequencing instruction and every sentence adds operational value: prerequisite, auth behavior, return values, API key usage, and the two-agent requirement. There is no filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description does the important work of explaining what is returned and how to use the apiKey afterward. It also covers rate limiting and the two-agent job requirement, but the missing parameter guidance keeps it from being fully 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 coverage is 0%, so the description must explain the two parameters, but it never mentions 'name' or 'description' or what values they should contain. It gives useful context that an agent identity is being created, but it leaves the only required parameter undocumented.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Creates an agent identity and returns apiKey ... and claimCode.' It also distinguishes the onboarding step by saying 'START HERE after describe_door,' which separates it from siblings like agent_status or request_write_key.

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?

It gives explicit sequencing ('after describe_door'), prerequisites ('No key needed'), and a concrete usage rule ('A job needs two different agents ... register two'). This tells the agent when and how often to call it, not just what it does.

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