identity__register_agent

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

With no annotations, the description discloses idempotency, deterministic DID output, and capability constraints. However, it lacks disclosure of authentication needs, rate limits, side effects of updates, or other behavioral traits, leaving significant gaps.

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 brief—two sentences—and efficiently conveys the core purpose. The bracketed prefix may be slightly extraneous but does not hinder clarity. Overall, it is well-structured and front-loaded.

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 no output schema, the description correctly explains the return type (a DID). It covers the main purpose but omits error scenarios, complete parameter coverage, and behavioral details. It is moderately complete for a simple registry tool.

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 compensate. It only adds context for the capabilities parameter (non-empty, lowercase tags). Other parameters like name, pubkey, pricing, endpoint, reputation_hint remain unexplained. This is insufficient.

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 tool registers or idempotently updates an agent identity, returns a deterministic content-addressed DID, and explains that capabilities is a non-empty list of lowercase tags. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like identity__describe_agent or identity__revoke_agent.

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 mentions idempotent update but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives among the many sibling tools. No when-to-use or when-not-to-use information is given.

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