agents_registry_lookup

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It does not disclose what the tool returns (e.g., agent details, list of agents) or behavior when no parameters are provided (all optional). Also lacks details like rate limits or authentication needs.

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?

One sentence with no wasted words. However, it could be expanded slightly to include key behavioral notes. Still efficiently communicates the main purpose.

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?

No output schema, so the description should mention return values. It does not. Also, it is ambiguous whether the three lookup modes are exclusive or combinable with capabilities. Incomplete for a lookup tool with multiple optional parameters.

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 clear descriptions for each parameter. The description adds minimal value beyond summarizing the parameters as lookup modes, but does not clarify parameter combinations or defaults. 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 tool's core function: looking up agents by ID, domain, or searching by name/capabilities. It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from sibling tools like 'whoami' (self) and 'inbox' (messages).

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it's unclear whether 'lookup' vs 'whoami' should be used for retrieving own agent info. The description does not mention exclusions or prerequisites.

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