Register a repo as a Service node in the factory graph.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| npub | No | ||
| repo_name | Yes | Repository name, e.g. 'tollbooth-sample'. | |
| repo_npub | Yes | The service's own Nostr npub (the repo as an actor). | |
| dpop_token | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as idempotency, side effects, authorization requirements, rate limits, or what happens to existing registrations.
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 a single short sentence, which is concise but lacks necessary detail. It could be improved by adding more context without being verbose.
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 absence of an output schema and annotations, and the presence of four parameters, the description is far too minimal. It does not explain the registration process, idempotency, or what the tool returns.
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 50% (two of four parameters have descriptions). The tool description adds no additional meaning to the parameters; it merely lists them in the schema without 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?
Description clearly states the verb 'register', the resource 'repo', and the target 'Service node in the factory graph'. It is specific and distinct from sibling tools.
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, no prerequisites or exclusions. The usage context is only implied by the purpose.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.