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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates a registration mutation but omits key details such as whether agent_id must be unique, what happens on duplicate registration, required permissions, side effects, and what the operation returns.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with no obvious filler. The parenthetical examples add some value, though they are ambiguous enough that the sentence could be more precise without becoming bloated.

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 annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, this is a mutation tool with two required parameters that need explanation. The description is far too thin to be complete for an agent that must 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 0%, so the description must compensate for both parameters. It gives a hint about the 'functions' parameter via examples like search/agent/training, but does not explain agent_id at all or specify the array element structure, allowed values, or format expectations.

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 gives a specific verb and resource: 'Register an agent', and adds that it involves 'declared functions'. The parenthetical examples clarify the kinds of functions, but the definition does not explicitly differentiate this tool from any sibling, so it falls short of a 5.

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 states what the tool does but gives no guidance on when to use it, when not to use it, or what alternatives exist. An agent must infer the appropriate context entirely from the name and schema.

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