agents-register

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses upsert behavior and side effects on webhook and worktree parameters, but fails to clarify the unexplained 'user_id' in the upsert key, reducing transparency.

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 concisely structured in two sentences with a front-loaded verb and key details. However, the inclusion of 'user_id' without schema support introduces potential confusion, slightly reducing clarity.

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 the tool has 6 parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, upsert behavior, return value, and specific parameter behaviors. It lacks explicit error conditions and clarification on user_id, but is fairly complete for a registration 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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond schema by explaining upsert keys (though user_id is absent), webhook URL purpose, and worktree edge creation, enhancing understanding.

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 verb 'Registers' and the resource 'MCP agent session', specifies upsert behavior on reconnection, and mentions the return value 'agent_session_id', distinguishing it from siblings like 'agents-deregister' and 'agents-get'.

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 explains when to use (register a session, upsert on reconnect) but omits explicit guidance on when not to use or how it relates to sibling tools like 'agents-heartbeat' or 'agents-list'. The mention of 'user_id' in the upsert key is confusing as it is not in the input schema.

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