news_register_editor

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden and does so well: it discloses that the API is shut down (410 Gone) and that the new system uses on-chain governance. This is exactly the behavioral context needed to prevent accidental invocation.

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 deprecation warning is front-loaded with a clear symbol, followed by concise reasons and alternatives. Every sentence adds value without waste.

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 the tool is deprecated, has an empty schema, and no annotations, the description provides all necessary information: why not to use it and what to use instead. It is complete for its purpose.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description appropriately does not discuss parameters, as none exist.

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 former purpose (registering an editor via aibtc.news) and its deprecated status, explicitly naming replacement tools (legion_contribute, legion_status). An agent can unambiguously identify this as a deprecated tool and know where to go instead.

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?

It explicitly says 'do not use' and provides concrete alternatives with a suggested starting point (legion_status). This is a complete when/when-not guide, leaving no ambiguity about routing.

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