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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is given. The description usefully adds that creation does not itself send the questionnaire, but says nothing about whether the new form is immediately active (a toggle_anamnesis_form sibling exists) or how send_to_new_students changes that.

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 clauses, front-loaded with the action, zero filler; the semicolon pointer to the sibling is efficient. It is, however, terse to the point of omitting things the agent needs, so it is concision at the edge of under-specification.

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?

With four parameters, a nested fields array and no output schema, the description does not tell the agent what is returned (crucially, the form identifier needed to call send_anamnesis) or how the field objects map to questions. For a create tool in a multi-step workflow, that is a substantial gap.

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 description coverage is only 25%, and the description adds no parameter meaning at all: it never mentions title, the fields array structure, or that options are needed for select/radio/checkbox field types. The agent must infer the whole form-authoring contract from the schema alone.

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 ("Creates a health questionnaire") and explicitly separates itself from send_anamnesis, which is the only sibling that could be confused with it. An agent can tell create vs. send vs. list/get without opening any schema.

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 sentence "send_anamnesis sends it to a student" tells the agent that authoring and distribution are two steps, which is the key routing decision here. It stops short of stating when-not to use it or that existing forms should be modified with update_anamnesis_form instead.

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