Retrieves the parameters needed to begin passkey enrollment for a user. Returns the challenge and options required for the WebAuthn registration ceremony.
GET /api/passkeys/registration/options Get registration options for passkey Tags: Passkeys Controller
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state that this requires authentication, what the response contains (e.g., challenge/creation options), or any side effects. Only the HTTP method and path are given, which is minimal context.
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 short and front-loaded with the core action. The inclusion of the HTTP method, path, and tags is somewhat redundant but not excessively 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?
For a web-auth tool with no annotations, no output schema, and no parameters, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what registration options are returned, their format, or any expected client behavior, leaving significant gaps for an agent to infer.
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?
With zero parameters and 100% schema description coverage (vacuously), the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter details, but there are none to describe.
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 states the operation ('Get registration options for passkey') along with the HTTP method and path, which clarifies the resource. However, it is somewhat redundant with the tool name and does not differentiate from the sibling passkey_passkey_registration_verify, leaving the functional distinction unclear.
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 when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or alternatives are provided. The description gives no indication of when an agent should call this versus passkey_passkey_registration_verify or the authentication options tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.