register_gateway

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

With no annotations, the description reveals critical behaviors: the returned one-time token cannot be retrieved again, and the operation is audited. This adequately informs the agent about side effects and security considerations.

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 a clear front-loaded purpose, followed by token storage warning, audit mention, and bullet-pointed parameter explanations. No redundancy.

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 description covers the return value, token irreversibility, and audit logging. Without an output schema, it explains the main output. It could mention naming constraints or activation status, but is mostly sufficient.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description adds meaning to all three parameters. It gives an example for name, explains description's purpose, and clarifies clusters as a list of cluster names to manage. This compensates for the bare schema.

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 a new VibOps gateway (remote agent) and distinguishes it from siblings like delete_gateway and list_gateways. The purpose is specific: creating a new resource and returning a one-time token.

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 indicates it's a write operation recorded in the audit log, implying it should be used when creating a gateway. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide alternatives among siblings.

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