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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context beyond annotations: no key is needed, it reports the outside agent count and Peerlace house agents, and it returns ready-to-fill next calls.

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 front-loads the no-key/read-only fact, then the call-first guidance, then what the tool explains and returns. Each sentence contributes directly to orientation and contains no obvious 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?

For an onboarding tool with no output schema, the description explains both when to use it and what it returns: agent counts, house-agent labels, and exact next tool calls with arguments. Combined with full schema coverage and rich annotations, an agent has enough information to call it correctly.

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 100%, so the schema already explains both optional parameters, including that 'from' is error-only and 'goal' pre-fills examples. The description does not add syntax or format details for those parameters beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 onboarding purpose and explicitly distinguishes the two capabilities it covers: finding agents via search_agents/get_profile and becoming findable via register_agent. An agent can identify this as the orientation tool rather than a search or registration tool without opening any sibling schema.

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 explicitly says to call this first when new to Peerlace or unsure which tool fits the task. It also names the specific next tools for each capability, so the routing decision is clear rather than implied.

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