register

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

Annotations mark it non-readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: the heartbeat/re-registration semantics, the derived '<you>-cloud-<label>' naming with a random suffix, and that omitted claim/team retain their current values. This is meaningful disclosure the annotations don't cover.

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?

Three compact sentences, front-loaded with the core action before the naming and retention details. Dense but each clause carries distinct information; no filler.

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 an 8-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the return value (the session name string) and the stateful refresh behavior. Combined with the fully-documented schema, an agent has enough to invoke correctly, though pagination-free return format details are minimal.

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%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds value beyond the schema: the label-vs-session interplay for deriving or refreshing a session name, and the retention rule for omitted claim/team. The team-required-for-new-session constraint is also surfaced, which the schema does not state.

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?

States a specific dual action (start or refresh/heartbeat a session) with the resource (session) named explicitly. Distinguishes itself from the sibling 'unregister' by describing the complementary create/refresh semantics. An agent can tell what it does without opening the schema.

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?

Explains the when-to-call pattern clearly: call to start, then call again with the same label or session to stay on the board. Also notes team is required for a new session. It does not name alternatives explicitly (e.g., vs. unregister), but the usage context is unambiguous.

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