register_agent

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It reveals non-obvious side effects: a claim email is sent to ownerEmail and the agent must be claimed via OAuth in the dashboard, indicating the agent is not immediately active. However, it does not mention return values or activation state, keeping it a step below a perfect score.

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, front-loaded with the primary action, and contains no fluff. Both sentences contribute meaningful information about the creation and claiming process.

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 tool with 7 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It explains the high-level flow but fails to document parameter meanings or return values, leaving significant gaps for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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 only 14%, so the description must compensate for the lack of parameter information. It only clarifies ownerEmail (the recipient of the claim email), leaving agentHandle, name, campaign, vertical, description, and initialJobId unexplained. This is inadequate for a tool with 7 parameters.

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 'Create a new agent signup' with a specific verb and resource, and it distinguishes from sibling read tools like list_agents and get_agent by focusing on creation. The mention of sending a claim email further sharpens its unique purpose.

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 description implies when to use the tool (when creating a new agent) and provides context about the two-step signup flow, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions. No 'use instead when...' guidance is given, so it remains at implied usage level.

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