register_agent

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses that this is a write operation requiring AGENTGRAPH_API_KEY, explains the return fields (agent_id, did_web, api_key, claim_token), and describes the post-registration trust score behavior. It lacks mention of potential side effects or limits but is fairly thorough.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the core action and return, followed by behavioral context and a sibling reference. Every sentence adds value with 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?

For a tool with 3 parameters (1 required) and no output schema, the description fully covers the return fields, behavioral details (trust score), env var requirement, and sibling differentiation. It is contextually complete.

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 detailed descriptions for each parameter (display_name, capabilities, operator_email). The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema; it only mentions the return value related to some parameters. Hence, baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'Register' and the resource 'new AI agent on AgentGraph with a W3C decentralized identifier (DID)', which is specific and distinct from sibling tools. It also explicitly mentions an alternative tool (bot_bootstrap) for one-call onboarding, helping to differentiate.

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 provides clear context for when to use this tool (registering an agent with a DID) and explicitly directs to bot_bootstrap for simpler onboarding. However, it does not elaborate on when not to use it or cover other sibling tools, leaving some gaps.

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