Register a new Alza account

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, and the description adds important context: it is a high-impact, credential-bearing side effect that creates a real account the user must manage. No contradiction with annotations; this goes beyond what annotations convey.

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?

Three sentences, each earning its place: the core purpose, the high-impact warning with usage constraints, and the exclusion of the sign-in flow. Information is front-loaded and there is no filler.

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 high-impact mutation, the description covers prerequisites (confirmation_token, user confirmation), exclusions (auth flow), and names the underlying API. An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation. The definition is complete for an agent to decide whether and how to invoke it.

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 100%, so parameters are already fully documented. The description adds minimal new meaning beyond listing the fields and noting the code is optional depending on Alza's requirement. This is an acceptable baseline given the schema's completeness.

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 and resource: 'Register a new Alza account' with the concrete inputs (email, phone, password, optional verification code). It also explicitly differentiates from the auth_start/auth_exchange flow, so an agent can distinguish it from sibling tools without opening schemas.

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?

Provides explicit conditions: use only with explicit user confirmation, requires a one-time token from prepare_mutation, and names the alternative flow for signing in an existing account. This gives the agent clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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