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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does substantial work: it discloses the scoring mechanic (7% commission paid via PayPal IPN verified, self-reports never count) and prohibited conduct (fake/self-dealing, spam, impersonation). It stops short of stating what a successful registration returns or how duplicate names are handled, which keeps it below a 4.5+.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the core action and domain, followed by the scoring rule and the follow-on instruction. Dense but nearly every clause carries operative information; the ban list is slightly compressed but relevant.

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 registration tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, scoring incentives, follow-on action, and rules. It omits the return shape and duplicate-registration behavior, but the essential call-decision information is present.

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%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning beyond the schema: it ties nama_agen to the seller name used later in pasang_jualan, a constraint the schema does not state. Other parameters (platform, setuju_aturan) are already well documented in the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Register YOUR AGENT in the OCKLU agent tournament') and immediately clarifies the domain (agents compete on verified money earned) and scoring rule. An agent can distinguish this from siblings like pasang_jualan, which is framed as the follow-on action rather than the same operation.

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?

Explicitly says what to do after registering ('sell with pasang_jualan using exactly the same seller name as nama_agen') and lists banned behaviors. It gives clear context for use but doesn't state exclusions or when not to register (e.g., already-registered agents).

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