register_credit_threshold

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses important behavioral traits: crossing direction triggers (from below), event names (credit.warning, credit.at_limit, credit.recovered), the 9500 bps special case, the per-agent cap, and authentication requirement. This goes well beyond a typical one-liner.

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 brief, front-loaded with the primary action, and every sentence adds meaningful detail (event triggers, recovery, cap, auth). No wasted words.

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 two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the key aspects: purpose, event behavior, cap, and authentication. Gaps such as return value/created resource formatting and duplicate handling exist, but the description is complete enough for correct tool selection and basic invocation.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds extra semantic value by explaining the crossing direction ('from below'), the recovery event ('Drops below'), and the 9500 bps special case, which are not fully captured in the schema parameter descriptions alone.

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 uses a specific verb ('Register') and resource ('credit-utilization threshold'), and clearly differentiates from sibling tools list_credit_thresholds and delete_credit_threshold by focusing on creation and resulting webhook events.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool (to create a threshold), including constraints like the cap of 20 thresholds per agent and requirement of an agent key. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the context is sufficient.

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