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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, but the description adds a critical behavioral trait: STATELESS. It explains the consequence of omitting prior state and warns that earlier choices will look 'missing'. This goes well beyond what annotations or schema could convey.

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 front-loaded with purpose, then delivers the critical statelessness warning, then gives a concrete exit condition. Every sentence earns its place and there is no filler.

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 definition covers the essential operational details: statelessness, full-state requirement, and handoff to page_create_from_brief. With an output schema present, return values need no explanation. It leaves locale and stepId partly to schema inference, but the tool is still safely invocable.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by enumerating the exact fields needed in selection and knownFields. It omits locale and stepId semantics, but the stepId enum is reasonably self-descriptive and the main risk around state accumulation is well covered.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Validate onboarding selections and return the remaining checklist.' It clearly identifies what the tool does and distinguishes itself from page_create_from_brief by explicitly stating when that sibling should be called instead.

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 usage rules: every call must include the FULL accumulated selection and knownFields, not just the latest answer. It also states when to stop using this tool and call page_create_from_brief instead, which is strong when-to-use versus alternative guidance.

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