agent_chat_register

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden. It only states 'Register as an agent' without explaining side effects, idempotency, or what happens upon registration. The lack of details on the registration process limits 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 a single concise sentence that effectively front-loads the core purpose. It wastes no words, though it might benefit from slightly more detail without becoming verbose.

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 simple schema and no output schema, the description lacks sufficient context. It does not explain what 'register' means in the chat room context, such as whether it creates a user session or requires prior setup. The presence of sibling tools suggests a broader chat system, but the description leaves integration assumptions unclear.

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% with clear parameter descriptions ('Agent name.', 'Room name.'). The tool description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema provides, resulting in a baseline score of 3.

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 verb 'Register' and resource 'agent in the chat room' clearly indicate the tool's function. It distinguishes from siblings (helper, send, watch) by specifying registration. However, it could be more explicit about whether registration creates a new agent or joins an existing chat.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like agent_chat_helper or agent_chat_send. The description does not mention prerequisites, such as whether the room must already exist, nor does it indicate if registration is required before using other tools.

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