sap_register_agent

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It states it registers an agent, but omits crucial details: whether this is an on-chain transaction, if it requires fees, what happens to existing registrations, or any persistence guarantees. The single sentence is insufficient.

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 sentence, which is concise, but it lacks structure and does not front-load the most critical information. It barely earns its place, missing details a user would need.

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?

With 9 parameters and no output schema, the description should provide rich context. It fails to explain the registration process, return values (e.g., agent ID), or any side effects. The description is too sparse for a complex tool.

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% with parameter descriptions, so baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides; it does not clarify relationships between parameters or usage constraints.

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 the tool registers the connected wallet as an SAP agent, using the verb 'register' and specifying the resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'sap_update_agent' or 'sap_deactivate_agent', leaving ambiguity about lifecycle stage.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'sap_update_agent' for modifications). There is no mention of prerequisite steps, such as wallet connection, or scenarios where registration should be avoided.

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