register_directory

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose a key trait: 'Returns immediately — the daemon records the registration in the background.' However, it omits other behavioral details such as idempotency, permission requirements, or error handling, leaving gaps in 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 concise and front-loaded: first sentence states the action, second explains the asynchronous behavior, and the Args section lists the parameters. Every sentence carries necessary information with no fluff.

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 low complexity (two params, one optional) and the presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's purpose, key behavior, and parameters. It might benefit from an example or note on prerequisites, but for a simple registration tool it is mostly complete.

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 compensates by explaining both parameters: directory is an absolute path, and collection defaults to the directory name if empty. This adds meaningful semantics beyond the raw schema types and titles.

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 ('Register') and resource ('a directory') with a clear purpose ('for incremental sync'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like deregister_directory (opposite operation) and sync_all_registrations (bulk sync action).

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 explicit guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The description explains the asynchronous behavior but does not mention when registration is appropriate or how it relates to siblings like ingest or remember. Usage context is only implied by the tool name.

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