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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It only states that the tool is the first question; it does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, what it returns, whether it resets or starts state, or whether it has any side effects.

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 a single sentence with no filler, and the most important fact ('first question') is front-loaded. It is appropriately concise, though the lack of a verb makes it slightly less informative than it could be.

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 simple zero-parameter start tool, the description is minimally adequate, but without annotations or an output schema it should clarify what the agent should expect when calling the tool and how the call relates to follow-up tools. These gaps leave room for mis-selection.

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, so the empty schema is fully complete. There are no parameter semantics for the description to add, and the baseline of 4 applies because there is nothing missing.

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 identifies the resource ('Which Portuguese descent route? decision guide') and its position ('first question'), but it lacks an action verb. It does not explicitly say that invoking the tool starts the guide or displays the first question, so the tool's purpose is somewhat vague and must be inferred.

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 phrase 'first question' implies this tool should be used at the beginning of the decision guide, but the description gives no explicit guidance about when to use it versus sibling tools like checker_answer or checker_tree. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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