Register agent presence

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral disclosure burden. It states the outcome (others can discover the agent), but does not disclose whether re-registration overwrites or merges capabilities, whether authentication is required, persistence/lifetime, or what the response contains.

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. It communicates both the action and the purpose without wasting words.

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 is simple with only two fully documented parameters, but there is no output schema or behavioral guidance on registration duplication, update semantics, or return values. The description is minimally adequate but leaves operational edge cases unstated.

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 100%, with clear examples for 'agent' and 'capabilities'. The tool description itself adds no extra parameter semantics beyond echoing the schema, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb ('announce') and resource ('an agent and its capabilities'), clearly conveying the registration action and its purpose. It is distinct from sibling tools like bridge_send (messaging) or bridge_agents (listing/discovery).

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 phrase 'so others can discover it' establishes the intended context (making an agent discoverable). It does not explicitly exclude alternatives or mention when not to use it, but the context is clear enough for a simple registration tool.

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