createNewUser

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It does so well by stating the action (emails an OTP + code ref), the negative (does not create an account), and the required continuation. It omits details like authentication requirements or rate limits, but the disclosed behavior is not misleading.

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?

Two sentences, both dense with useful information. The main action is front-loaded, and the most important caveat ('does NOT create the account') appears immediately. No filler or repetition.

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?

The description explains the action and next step, but with no output schema it does not state what the tool returns. Since the agent presumably needs the code ref to call validateNewUser, the lack of return-value documentation leaves a meaningful gap in flow completion.

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 67%, with email and name having descriptions. The tool description itself adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema. It does not clarify the phone parameter or how the parameters relate to the activation flow, so it only meets the baseline.

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 this tool requests an account-activation code by email and explicitly clarifies that it does NOT create the account. It names the follow-up tool (validateNewUser), making the tool's role in the larger flow unambiguous despite the 'createNewUser' name.

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?

The description tells the agent to call validateNewUser to finish account activation, which is a clear next-step instruction. It also prevents misuse by saying the account is not created here, but it does not explicitly compare against sibling tools like requestOtp or loginUser.

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