agent_register

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

Beyond the idempotentHint annotation, the description discloses that the operation is lightweight ('tidak membuka WebSocket'), only sets local name and identity, maintains a stable agent ID across sessions via local cache, and uses a permanent Cloudflare Workers relay. These are valuable behavioral traits not present in annotations.

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 well-structured with an overview, usage guidance, args, and returns. Each section earns its place, though the sentence about Cloudflare Workers relay is slightly tangential and could be trimmed without losing core meaning.

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 simple one-parameter tool, the description covers purpose, mandatory ordering, idempotency, return format (JSON with name, server URL, stable_agent_identity_id, confirmation), and side effects (stable identity). It is complete enough for an agent to invoke correctly without additional context.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description fully compensates by explaining the only parameter: 'params.name (str, opsional): Nama display agent. Jika kosong, nama acak digunakan.' It adds type, optionality, display purpose, and behavior for empty values, going well beyond the bare schema.

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 opens with 'Daftarkan agent ke AgentLink' (Register agent to AgentLink), clearly stating the action and target. It further distinguishes itself by declaring 'Wajib dipanggil pertama sebelum tools lain' (must be called first before other tools), making its unique role explicit compared to sibling room/task/capability tools.

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 when to use: 'Wajib dipanggil pertama sebelum tools lain' and 'Gunakan segera setelah startup, sebelum room_create atau room_join.' It also clarifies repeated calls are safe and idempotent, which is essential usage guidance. Since it's mandatory, no alternatives are needed.

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