browse_registry

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It indicates the registry is public and the action is browsing (read-only), but does not explicitly confirm no side effects, rate limits, or authentication requirements. The description adds some context but lacks completeness.

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 concise with three sentences, each serving a purpose. It front-loads the main function, then provides filter usage. No redundant or vague language.

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 no output schema, so the description should describe return values. It only says 'recently issued licenses and licensable content' without details on format, fields, or ordering. For a browsing tool with three parameters, the description is adequate but lacks output granularity.

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 three parameters. The description adds value by explaining the practical use of publisher_id and article_id filters (exploring publisher content, viewing article licenses). The limit parameter is not elaborated, but the schema covers it well.

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 browses the public Opedd license registry, listing recent licenses and licensable content. It uses a specific verb and resource, and the purpose is distinct from sibling tools like purchase or verify.

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 explains when to use filters (by publisher_id or article_id) with clear examples. It does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or list alternatives, but the context is sufficient for appropriate selection.

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