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 behavioral disclosure. It indicates this is the first question in a decision guide, which suggests a read-like, non-mutating start, but it does not explain whether calling it advances state, displays the question, returns options, or requires any preceding action.

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, concise sentence with no filler. It front-loads the essential fact—that this is the first question of the guide—and every word earns its place.

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 zero-parameter starting step, the description is enough to identify when to invoke it, but without an output schema or any note about what the tool returns (the question text? a prompt? a state change?), an agent cannot fully anticipate the result. It is minimally adequate but leaves the behavior of the call unclear.

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 and the schema coverage is effectively complete, so there is nothing the description needs to add about parameter meaning. The baseline of 4 applies because no parameter semantics are required.

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 a specific resource—the first question of the 'What applies when you leave?' decision guide—and clearly positions it as the entry point. It is distinguishable from the sibling checker_answer and checker_tree tools, which appear to handle subsequent steps, though it does not state what the question itself is.

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 implies this tool should be used to begin the decision guide, but it never explicitly says 'call this when starting the guide' or contrasts it with checker_answer, checker_tree, or the enquiry_* tools. Usage context is present only by implication, not direct guidance.

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