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

Beyond the annotations' simple write hint, it discloses that a generated password is returned exactly once, a long-lived API key is minted by default for agent reconnection, and that auth uses a configured `appJwt`. It also enumerates concrete error codes for 401, 422, and 429, giving the agent actionable behavioral expectations.

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 compact, front-loaded with the core action, and every sentence carries unique value—session binding, API key reconnection, auth prerequisites, error codes, and the sibling alternative. No 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?

Despite having no output schema, the description covers the critical operational facts an agent needs: auth requirements, expected errors, default API key creation, and the one-time visibility of generated credentials. For a 7-parameter registration tool, this is complete.

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 documents every parameter. The description reinforces the generated-password-once behavior and the API key defaults, but adds limited meaning beyond the schema's own field descriptions. A baseline 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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Create a new Ethora user account by email + first/last name, then log in and bind the session.' It also differentiates itself from the sibling ethora-user-login and batch creation, making the tool's unique role clear.

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 gives clear context: single-user registration with optional API key generation for agent reconnection, and names `ethora-user-batch-create` for bulk provisioning. It doesn't explicitly say 'use ethora-user-login for existing users,' but the registration-vs-bulk distinction is enough.

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