register_operator

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It prominently warns that the returned API key and recovery code cannot be retrieved later, which is a critical side effect. It also reveals the return payload, giving the agent actionable knowledge about what to preserve.

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 tight sentences plus a tip, with the key action front-loaded and the critical warning immediately after. Every sentence earns its place, and the urgent 'cannot be retrieved later' warning is clearly highlighted.

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?

For a simple registration tool with no required parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential call information: what it does, what it returns, and the irreversible consequence of losing the credentials. The optional email behavior is documented in the schema, so nothing critical is missing.

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%, so the baseline is 3 even without extra parameter detail in the description. The description's 'Tip' about passing an email reinforces the schema's promo guidance but does not add new semantic meaning beyond what the email parameter already documents.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Register a new operator account.' It also clarifies the outcome by saying the tool returns an API key and recovery code. This distinguishes it from related siblings like recover_account, update_operator, and create_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 usage context is implied by 'Register a new operator account,' but the description does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this tool. For example, it does not say to use update_operator for existing accounts or recover_account for lost credentials. The promo tip is parameter guidance, not tool-selection guidance.

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