pull_register

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'register,' which implies a mutation, but it does not explain side effects (e.g., overwriting existing registrations), prerequisites, or the outcome of registration. This is insufficient for a config tool.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core purpose. Every word earns its place, with no unnecessary filler or repetition.

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?

The tool has 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, so the description needs to provide sufficient context for correct invocation. While it explains the purpose, it does not cover return values, error conditions, or parameter usage details, leaving significant gaps for an agent.

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 only 33% (one of three parameters is described). The tool description mentions 'shortcode' but does not explain the meaning or expected format of shortCode, callbackUrl, or nominatedNumber beyond what the schema already provides. It fails to compensate for the low schema coverage.

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 action ('Register a shortcode') and the specific resource ('Pull Transactions API'). It also provides context ('fetch missed C2B transactions after an outage') that differentiates it from sibling tools like pull_transactions or c2b_register_urls.

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 gives clear context for when to use this tool (after an outage to enable fetching missed C2B transactions), but it does not explicitly state exclusions or alternatives. The context is useful but not as explicit as naming alternatives.

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