singularis_register_key

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses that one call saves and reuses the key (no repeat calls needed), the required inputs, the starting-credit return, and a caveat about unapproved countries. It does not mention auth/prerequisite state or any rate limiting on the registration itself, which is the only real gap.

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?

Four tight sentences, front-loading the purpose before the usage trigger and parameter notes. Slightly denser than necessary in the final sentence about country availability, but every sentence carries information.

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?

Although an output schema exists (so return values aren't strictly required in the description), the description still notes the starting-credits return, plus the error trigger and country caveat. For a small 3-param bootstrap tool this is close to complete; only prerequisite/auth nuance is absent.

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, and it does: country is tied to an ISO format ('such as US'), agent_name is characterized as 'short', and operator_contact is explicitly optional. That covers all three parameters with enough meaning to fill them correctly.

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?

States a specific verb (register/get) and resource (Singularis API key) scoped to 'this agent', which is unambiguous and clearly distinct from the numerics/compute siblings. An agent can tell instantly this is a bootstrap/credential tool, not a computation tool.

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?

Gives an explicit trigger condition: 'Use when any Singularis tool reports error=no_api_key.' It also flags the not-yet-available case (outside approved countries) so the agent knows the failure mode. Nothing is left to inference.

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