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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It describes what profiles can contain but does not disclose registration behavior such as overwriting, validation, permissions, or side effects. The 'never invents' note pertains to routing, not the registration action itself.

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 two sentences: the first defines the purpose, the second lists the profile attributes and a constraint. It is compact and front-loaded, though the second sentence is a long enumeration.

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?

For a registration tool with one required parameter, the description covers the core purpose and the main content of the profile. However, it lacks information about handling existing profiles, required prerequisites, and the return value (even though an output schema exists). The absence of annotations further reduces completeness.

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%. The description does not mention 'profile' or 'request_id' by name, but it does explain what can be included inside the profile object (quality, reliability, costs, etc.), adding some meaning to that opaque structure. The optional request_id parameter is entirely unexplained.

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 a 'caller-owned Wu Wei execution profile' and lists the profile types. The verb 'Register' plus the resource distinguishes it from routing and reporting 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?

The phrase 'Routing never invents capacity or energy evidence' implicitly suggests registering profiles to provide such evidence before routing, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide any when-not-to-use guidance.

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