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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=false, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description reinforces the closed-corpus nature ('built-in help') and notes the workspace_key prerequisite, but says nothing about what happens when no answer is found or whether it escalates.

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 short sentences with no filler, and the prerequisite is front-loaded in parentheses. The parenthetical placement is slightly awkward but costs nothing in clarity.

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 two-parameter read-only lookup with no output schema, the definition covers purpose, prerequisite, topic scope, and call priority. Only the unanswered-question behavior is left unstated.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds a topic taxonomy (sign-in trouble, plans, deals, dues, 1099s, AI connection, branding) that gives concrete guidance on how to phrase the 'question' parameter beyond the schema's generic 'what went wrong'.

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 — 'answers from the built-in help for a question' — and enumerates concrete topics (sign-in, plans, deals, dues, 1099s, AI connection, branding). It does not explicitly differentiate itself from close siblings like about_avlira, get_started, or contact_avlira_support, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

'Try this FIRST when the owner is stuck' gives explicit ordering guidance that implicitly positions it ahead of contact_avlira_support. It lacks an explicit when-not clause or a named escalation path for unanswered questions.

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