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

Annotations indicate a non-read, non-destructive mutation. The description adds value by detailing required permission checks, business tier restrictions, and required user-facing steps (grace-period warning, resubscribe link). Missing details on side effects or return behavior, but sufficient for the operation.

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 front-loaded with the core action and then adds necessary prerequisite steps. It is efficient but could be slightly shorter by removing redundant phrasing (e.g., 'check business permissions' and 'FREE businesses cannot use' could be combined).

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?

Covers permission and access constraints well, but lacks parameter descriptions and does not explain what happens after completion (e.g., return value, state changes). For a mutation tool with no output schema, the agent needs more context on the outcome.

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 input schema has two required parameters (communityId, type) with 0% coverage (no descriptions). The tool description does not explain what 'type' represents or how to specify it, leaving the agent without guidance on parameter meaning or format.

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 verb 'mark complete' and the resource 'get-started checklist item for a managed community'. It distinguishes from siblings like 'dismiss_cmp_home_get_started' and 'get_cmp_home_get_started' by specifying the action type and context.

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?

Explicitly provides when-to-use and when-not-to-use conditions: check business permissions, FREE businesses cannot use, call check_business_tool_access first, show grace-period warning and resubscribe link, never proceed if blocked. This is comprehensive guidance for an AI agent.

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