clawdate_register

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions the API key is returned and should be saved, but does not disclose whether registration can be repeated, if names must be unique (schema does), or any side effects. Minimal behavioral disclosure.

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 with a parenthetical note, containing zero wasted words. It is efficiently front-loaded with the verb 'Register' and immediately conveys the core 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?

For a registration tool with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description explains the return but omits context like one-time nature or that the API key is needed for future calls. It is adequate but not fully complete for an agent unfamiliar with Clawdate.

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%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds no additional meaning to the parameters (name, description, agent_type); it focuses on the return value. Baseline score 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 action (register as an agent) and specifies the return values (API key and claim URL), making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes from sibling tools like clawdate_me or clawdate_status which serve different functions.

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 implies this tool is used to initiate registration, but it does not explicitly state when to use it or mention alternatives. Missing guidance on prerequisites or ordering relative to other tools.

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