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

readOnlyHint=true already declares this is a non-mutating lookup, and the description is consistent with that. It adds somewhat useful context by listing the content areas returned (tool guides, goal index, retry/fence explanation), but gives no indication of output shape or behavior when parameters are omitted.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence covering exactly the three content areas with no filler or repetition.

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 low-complexity help tool with no output schema, the description adequately conveys what the tool surfaces. It falls short only on the no-argument case and on routing guidance relative to siblings.

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?

At 50% schema coverage, the 'tool' parameter is undocumented in the schema, but the description implies it selects 'the full guide to any tool' and links 'goal' to the goal index, adding some meaning. With zero required parameters, it never explains what a bare call returns, leaving a real gap.

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 names a specific resource (the help/guide content) and enumerates what it covers: a guide to any tool, a goal index, and retry/fence mechanics. This is clear enough for an agent to know it's a documentation-retrieval tool, though it doesn't explicitly contrast itself with the action-oriented siblings like act/tell/move.

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?

Usage is only implied: the presence of 'tool' and 'goal' parameters suggests you call it to look up a specific tool's guide or a goal index, but there is no explicit when-to-use statement, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives among the many sibling tools.

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