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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: the answer source is HomeMaster's own service guide, the `answered_from_guide=false` fallback semantics, and the ~20s latency warning. Only missing is anything about output shape, which is minor here.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, then provenance, then the exclusion routing. The aside about Helen/WhatsApp conveys provenance rather than filler, and nothing is repeated from the schema or annotations.

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 one-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description covers purpose, domain scope, answer provenance, a parseable fallback signal (`answered_from_guide`), latency expectations, and sibling routing. An agent has everything required to select and call it correctly.

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% for the single `question` parameter, so the description must carry the load, and it does by enumerating acceptable question topics and implicitly bounding the domain of valid input. It does not restate the min/maxLength constraints, but the semantic scope is clear.

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+resource ('Ask HomeMaster a question about its services and policies') and immediately scopes what kinds of questions are in-bounds (clean inclusions, supplies, pets, cancelling/rescheduling, preparation). It is immediately distinguishable from siblings like get_quote, find_times, and find_services.

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?

Gives explicit when-to-use (policy/service questions) and explicit when-not-to-use, naming the alternatives: 'Not for prices or times: use get_quote and find_times.' This is exactly the routing information an agent needs.

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