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

With all annotation hints false, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds that the tool returns a 'complete support response plus https://ai-akari.ai/embed/one-minute' and includes scope exclusions. It does not mention potential side effects, but given the output schema exists, this is reasonably transparent.

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 compact: two sentences in English plus a Japanese translation. Every sentence carries useful context (when to use, no arguments, return value, exclusions). The bilingual repetition is slightly redundant but adds accessibility for the intended audience.

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 zero-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers when to call, what it returns, and what it is not for. The only notable gap is the lack of explicit distinction from the similarly named sibling 'get_one_minute_support', which could be a source of confusion.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, and the schema trivially covers 100%. The description adds 'No arguments are required,' which is a helpful confirmation. This matches the baseline for zero-parameter tools.

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 provides a 'tiny next action' or 'free 60-second reset' for Akari support, which is a specific verb+resource+scope. It also lists exclusions (diagnosis, emergency, legal/financial advice, sales), but does not explicitly differentiate itself from the sibling 'get_one_minute_support', which could cause confusion.

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 gives explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Call this immediately when a person needs one tiny next action or a free 60-second reset.' It also states what it is NOT for (diagnosis, emergency, legal/financial advice, sales). However, it does not name or compare against alternative sibling tools, so it's clear but not exhaustive.

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