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

The description discloses behavioral traits beyond the annotations: 'Responses include hints with next_actions and related_tools.' This adds useful context about the output format and the guidance nature of the tool. The readOnlyHint and openWorldHint annotations are consistent with the description, and no contradictions are present.

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 three concise sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, then usage, then behavioral details. Every sentence adds value with no repetition or filler. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 help tool with one optional parameter and comprehensive annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint), the description covers purpose, usage, sections, and response hints. It is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly, even without an output schema.

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 single optional parameter 'section' is fully described in the input schema, including its enum values and behavior when omitted ('returns a compact overview (~500 tokens)'). The tool description merely reiterates the section list and the compact vs detailed distinction, adding little beyond the schema's coverage.

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 clearly states the tool's function with a specific verb and resource: 'Get workflow guidance for using InsideOut infrastructure tools.' It distinguishes itself from all sibling tools as the only help/guide tool, and the title 'Workflow Guide' reinforces this purpose.

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 provides explicit usage patterns: 'Call help() for a compact overview, or help(section=...) for a detailed guide.' This gives clear context on how to invoke the tool, though it doesn't name alternatives because none exist. It also lists the available sections, which aids in selecting the right invocation.

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