birth

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that it returns a soul_id and that the output must be used as an actor, which is a key behavioral trait. However, it does not mention whether calling it again fails, any side effects beyond creating an identity, or any error conditions. This is a partial disclosure.

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 two sentences plus an example, with the critical 'Step 1, once' front-loaded. Every sentence adds value, and the example is practical. It is appropriately sized and well-structured.

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?

For a tool that is the first step in a larger system, the description lacks completeness. It doesn't explain the meaning of 'covenant', doesn't describe any constraints on 'name', and doesn't mention error cases or idempotency. With no output schema and no annotations, the agent is left with gaps that could lead to incorrect invocations.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. The only parameter guidance is the example 'birth(name=Ember, covenant=[truth over comfort])'. While this illustrates usage, it does not explain what 'covenant' semantically represents or what constraints apply to 'name'. The description fails to provide adequate parameter documentation for an agent to fully understand what values to provide.

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 tool's purpose: to earn an identity as the first step, and it explicitly mentions the return of a soul_id. It distinguishes itself from siblings like remember or verify by positioning itself as the initial 'birth' action, and the phrase 'born, not configured' adds unique context.

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?

It explicitly states 'Step 1, once' and 'before acting', which gives clear when-to-use guidance. It also explains how to use the output ('use it or the name as actor from then on'), which is essential for subsequent tool calls. It doesn't mention alternatives, but given the sibling list, this is clearly the initialization tool.

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