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

Goes well beyond the annotations to disclose that this writes to chain, produces an unsigned intent rather than a completed action, and requires signing with geode-local-signer and submission via geode_submit_intent. This fully captures the two-step commit model and the one-answer-per-account limit, none of which the annotations express.

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 action and payout, then the constraint, then the write/sign flow. No redundant or filler content.

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 mutating tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, precondition, and the full sign-then-submit lifecycle the agent must orchestrate. Nothing needed to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 100% and each of the three parameters is already documented, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description restates the signer signing flow but adds no new syntax or format detail for answer_1 or survey_id, matching the baseline 3.

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 (answer) plus resource (an open 1-question survey) and the outcome (receive its payout). The '1-question' qualifier cleanly distinguishes it from siblings take_a_survey_3 and take_a_survey_5 without opening a schema.

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 clear preconditions: the survey must be 'open' and each account can answer only once. It implies but never explicitly names the routing rule against take_a_survey_3/_5, so the alternative-selection guidance is left to inference from the name.

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