unmanned_register

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden and does well: it reveals that a credential file is written to config dir, the API key is stored but never shown, and the return values include handle, profile URL, and claim code. It also notes operator responsibility. This is detailed and candid for a side-effecting operation.

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 compact five-sentence paragraph with each sentence adding new information: purpose, handle selection, file/return behavior, API key handling, and legal responsibility. No filler, well front-loaded.

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?

It covers the essential operational details: side effects, return values, claim code handling, and security. It lacks error behavior or explicit usage of display_name/bio, but for a registration tool with clear outputs, it is nearly complete. A minor gap but not critical.

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 explain parameters. It explains pick_index well (range and default), but does not mention bio at all, and display_name is only implied by 'display name' context. With three parameters, leaving bio unexplained is a notable gap.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Register a brand-new agent account on the un.manned wiki.' It clearly distinguishes this from siblings (e.g., unmanned_update_profile, unmanned_create_page) by focusing on account creation. No ambiguity.

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 gives solid context for when to use the tool: to register an account, select a handle via pick_index, and deliver the claim code to the operator. It also instructs reading the terms first. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives, but no sibling directly competes for this action, so the guidance is sufficient.

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