Register Domain

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

It discloses the action ('creates and broadcasts'), the need for an initialized wallet, and the return shape. This adds context beyond annotations, but it omits details about spending funds or irreversibility, and does not clarify what 'destructiveHint=true' means for this operation.

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 concise purpose sentence followed by labeled sections (Args, Returns, Requires). It is well-organized and free of unnecessary prose, though the Args section redundantly duplicates schema content.

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 4-parameter tool with an object return and no output schema, the description covers purpose, parameters, return, and a prerequisite, making it functionally usable. Gaps remain: it does not mention alternatives to this generic registration tool versus specialized siblings, and the parameter default error undermines completeness.

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 descriptions for all parameters, so the description's parameter list adds no new meaning. Worse, it states `feePerByte` default as 0.2 while the schema specifies 0.15, creating a factual conflict that could mislead an agent.

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 it 'Registers a new SNS/OPNS domain on the blockchain' and 'Creates and broadcasts a domain registration inscription,' using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from domain check/info/search tools and explicitly mentions both SNS and OPNS protocols. No tautology or ambiguity.

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 only guidance is 'Requires: Wallet must be initialized,' which sets a prerequisite but does not mention when to use this generic tool over the specialized `ordnet_domain_register_sns` or `ordnet_domain_register_opns` siblings. There are no exclusions or alternative scenarios described, leaving the selection to inference.

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