register_visitors_from_text

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that dry_run=true suppresses submission and that this is a bulk mutation, but says nothing about auth requirements, duplicate handling, parse-failure behavior, or reversibility.

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 operative content is front-loaded and clear in the first three sentences, but the trailing 'Keywords:' block is search-optimization padding that adds little selection value for an agent and inflates the length.

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?

Output schema exists so return values need not be described, but for a 7-parameter, no-annotation mutation tool the description omits the critical pasted-text format (expected columns/delimiters) and any pointer to the preview sibling. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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 0%, so the description must compensate and it only partially does: it explains text, dry_run, default_visit_date and default_visit_time, leaving default_floor, participation, default_purpose and the expected text column format undocumented. The date/time-column constraint is a genuinely useful semantic addition.

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 verb+resource: bulk-registering visitors from pasted text ('텍스트... 방문자 목록을 입력받아 일괄 등록합니다'). This is distinguishable from the singular register_visitor and the file-based register_visitors_from_file, though it never names those siblings explicitly.

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?

Gives one conditional: when the attendee list lacks date/time columns, set default_visit_date/default_visit_time. It also explains dry_run, but there is no guidance on when to prefer preview_visitors_from_text first or register_visitors_from_file instead. Usage is implied rather than framed against alternatives.

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