register_agent

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for disclosing side effects. It states that an API key and bonus credits are received, but does not explain persistence, reversibility, permission requirements, or what 'register' entails (e.g., creates a new agent record).

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 short sentence that conveys the key points efficiently. However, it could benefit from slight expansion to cover usage or parameter details.

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 only one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not describe return values, failure modes, or post-registration behavior, which are essential for correct usage.

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?

There is one required parameter 'name' with 0% schema coverage (no description). The tool description does not explain what 'name' represents (e.g., unique identifier, display name) or provide constraints, leaving the agent to guess.

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 uses the verb 'register' and specifies the resource ('agent') along with outcomes ('API key', 'bonus credits (free)'). This clearly conveys the tool's main action and distinguishes it from sibling tools like purchase_credits which likely require payment.

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 (e.g., for first-time registration) or when to avoid it. It does not mention alternatives from sibling tools, leaving the agent to infer context.

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