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

The description states 'Idempotent on wallet_address' but the annotation idempotentHint is false, creating a direct contradiction. Additionally, the description provides some context (non-custodial, public key) but this is undermined by the inconsistency.

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 brief (2 sentences) and front-loaded with the main action. It packs relevant details (capabilities list, protocols, idempotency note) without redundancy. Minor improvement possible by structuring with bullet points.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description lacks explanation of the Crank registry, the registration process, or side effects. With 10 parameters, a detailed breakdown is needed for correct invocation. The tool is part of a complex blockchain registry, so missing context reduces usability.

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%, requiring the description to compensate. Only capabilities and supported_protocols are partially explained (with example values), leaving 8 other parameters (e.g., wallet_address, display_name, description, contact, version, caller_id, a2a_card_url, mcp_endpoint) without any semantic context.

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 clearly states the tool registers/refreshes an agent's discovery profile in the Crank registry and mentions specific fields like capabilities and supported protocols. It distinguishes from creating a wallet (create_agent_wallet) and updating profile (update_agent_profile) by focusing on discovery, but does not explicitly differentiate from siblings.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_agent_wallet or update_agent_profile. The description implies usage for registering discovery but does not exclude other contexts or specify prerequisites.

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