agents_registry_whoami

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It correctly indicates a read-only operation returning identity information, but does not elaborate on whether any authentication or permissions are needed, or if there are any side effects. The description is clear but not deeply transparent.

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 sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose. There is no redundancy or unnecessary information. Every word is earned.

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?

Given that there is no output schema, the description could have been more complete by specifying the format or structure of the returned data. It mentions 'origin, public key, and registered agent details' but does not clarify if these are fields in a JSON object or something else. For a simple identity retrieval tool, it is marginally acceptable but not fully comprehensive.

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?

The input schema has zero parameters, so the description only needs to explain what the tool returns. It does so by listing the types of information included (origin, public key, registered agent details), which adds value beyond the empty schema. The baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and this description meets that.

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 retrieves information about the agent's own identity, including origin, public key, and registered agent details. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like agents_registry_lookup (which likely queries other agents) and agents_registry_send (for sending 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?

The description does not provide any when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. It does not mention alternatives like agents_registry_lookup for retrieving other agent identities, nor does it specify prerequisites or context for calling this tool.

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