Mint node registration token

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

Given annotations are minimal (only openWorldHint), the description carries the burden. It discloses 'Returned once' and 'Requires user session,' which are important behavioral details beyond what annotations provide. However, it omits potential side effects, error conditions, or idempotency, so coverage is moderate.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes purpose or critical behavioral nuance, making it highly efficient.

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?

The tool has four parameters, no output schema, and minimal annotations. The description only covers purpose and one behavioral trait, leaving the agent without essential context on parameters, return value structure, or error handling. It is incomplete for a tool of this complexity.

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%, with four parameters (org_id, scopes, peer_id, ttl_hours) lacking any descriptions. The tool description does not compensate for this by explaining parameter meaning or relationships, leaving the agent entirely uninformed about how to fill these fields.

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 a specific verb ('Create') and resource ('ere_reg_* token for node install'), which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like node_install_plan and apikey_create. The purpose is unambiguous and directly tied to the tool name and title.

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 usage for node install and requires a user session, providing context but no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention exclusions or direct siblings like apikey_create, so usage guidelines are only implied.

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