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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses that the agent is added immediately, appears in search results, and that an A2A discovery scan is triggered if the URL is reachable. It also notes optional fields improve discoverability. This is solid coverage of key behavior.

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 well-structured with a heading, clear explanatory paragraphs, and a response section. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and contains no filler. Though longer than a two-sentence model, every sentence serves a purpose.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (11 parameters, 2 required, no output schema), the description covers the essential context: what the tool does, immediate effects, optional field benefits, and the 201 response. It does not mention failure cases or authentication, but for a registration tool with a schema-rich parameter list, this is adequate.

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?

The input schema covers 100% of parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining that optional fields (pricing, features, integrations) improve discoverability, and implies that the URL is used for A2A scan triggering, enriching the schema's bare definitions.

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's function: 'Register a new AI agent in the Agentry directory' with a specific verb (register) and resource (AI agent). It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on new agent registration versus claiming, discovery, or listing operations.

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?

The description provides clear context for when to use this tool: to submit an AI agent for listing, with immediate addition and search visibility. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the context is unambiguous enough for basic selection.

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