register_subscription_monitor

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of disclosing side effects. It reveals the creation of a persistent scheduled monitor, but gives no details on idempotency, permissions, rate limits, or what happens at each scheduled run. This is minimal but not misleading.

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, efficient sentence with no filler. Every word adds meaning, and it is front-loaded with the action ('Create...').

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 has moderate complexity (4 params, 1 required) and no annotations, yet the description only covers the core action. It omits parameter meaning, scheduling behavior, and any caveats, making it incomplete for an agent to use confidently.

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 0%, so the description must clarify parameters. It only implicitly touches on subscription_url ('subscription URL'), leaving timeout_seconds, interval_seconds, and node_name_keyword unexplained. This fails to compensate for the schema's lack of detail.

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 'Create a scheduled connectivity monitor for an Xray subscription URL,' using a specific verb (create) and resource (scheduled monitor). It distinguishes from siblings like check_subscription_once by emphasizing 'scheduled' and 'monitor' rather than a one-time check.

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 for setting up recurring monitoring but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives. It lacks a clear 'when-not-to-use' or mention of sibling tools like check_subscription_once for one-off checks.

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