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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and non-destructive/closed-world, so 'Read-only' is redundant. The description earns credit elsewhere by enumerating the return shape, explaining the status enum values, and clarifying that 'available' is true only while onboarding may still be offered — semantics the annotations cannot convey.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose and return shape, then usage. Mostly earns its place, though the closing clause about answers becoming 'their living AI memory' is promotional rather than operational.

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?

With no output schema and no parameters, the description carries the return contract and does so by naming status, completed_at, available, steps, and questionnaire. Minor gap: what 'steps' contains and whether questionnaire can be null when not available.

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 takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4; the description correctly implies no input is needed and spends its words on outputs instead.

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 and resource ('Get the caller's warm-start onboarding state + the questionnaire definition'), scopes it to the caller, and flags it as read-only, which contrasts cleanly with the write-side sibling submit_onboarding. An agent can tell what it retrieves without opening the 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?

Explicitly says when to call it: 'Use it to know whether to invite the user to fill (or re-fill) the short profile survey.' That is a clear decision context, though it names no alternatives or when-not-to-call conditions.

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