ecash_register_profile

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only mentions a prerequisite ('Requires at least 1 puzzle solve') but does not disclose side effects, such as whether the profile is overwritten, whether it is permanent, or if any fees are involved. For a registration/mutation tool, this is insufficient transparency.

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 two sentences and every word earns its place. It states the purpose and a key prerequisite without any fluff or repetition, making it highly efficient and easy to parse.

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?

The tool is a simple registration action, so the description covers the core purpose and a critical requirement. However, it omits behavioral details like return values, idempotency, and potential errors, which would be helpful for an agent deciding whether and how to invoke it. The description is adequate but has clear gaps given no annotations or output schema.

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 provides 100% coverage of all three parameters (name, description, services) with clear descriptions. The tool description adds no additional parameter-level detail beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 your agent profile on-chain.' This uses a specific verb ('register') and distinguishes it from sibling tools like ecash_enroll_arbitrator. The added prerequisite ('Requires at least 1 puzzle solve') further scopes the tool's purpose.

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 clearly implies this tool is for registering an agent profile, which is a distinct use case from siblings. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools. The prerequisite about puzzle solves provides some usage context, but no explicit 'when to use' vs. 'when not to' is given.

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