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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does not meet it. It implies a mutation ('Register', 'stores') but says nothing about permissions, whether re-registration overwrites prior state, what 'green state' means, or what happens on failure.

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?

A single compact sentence with the action front-loaded, which is fine structurally. The cost note 'Free' and the opaque 'green state' phrase consume space without adding usable meaning.

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?

No output schema, no annotations, and 0% parameter coverage leave the description as the only source of truth, and it is too thin. An agent could not confidently construct the array payloads or predict the effect of calling this from what is written.

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 0% and both parameters are bare arrays with no item type, so the description must compensate and largely does not. It maps 'catalog' and 'probes' to the two parameters, but adds no information on element shape, whether probes reference catalog entries, or ordering constraints.

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 verb 'Register' plus the resources 'tool catalog + probe suite' gives a workable sense of the action, but the trailing clause 'stores the green state' is undefined jargon and there is no differentiation from siblings like start_loop or verify_recovery, which appear to sit in the same workflow.

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?

There is no statement of when this should be called, what must exist beforehand, or which sibling to use instead. The only usage-adjacent note is 'Free,' which hints at a billing distinction but does not tell the agent anything about selection.

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