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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and discloses critical behaviors: two-step validation, returned summary and consent line, confirmation token, email verification link required before providers see it, and the exact consent meaning. This is exemplary.

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?

Despite covering a complex two-step flow, every sentence earns its place. The critical 'NOT a purchase' constraint is front-loaded, and steps are clearly labeled without wasted words.

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 two-step consent-based enquiry tool with no output schema, the description fully explains inputs, outputs (summary, consent line, token), and post-submission behavior, leaving no gaps an agent would need to infer.

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%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds workflow context such as 'keyed by field key from enquiry_fields' and the step-1/step-2 role of the confirmation token, going beyond the schema's own descriptions.

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 states a specific verb+resource ('Submits an enquiry to Sauna Cold Plunge Compare') and immediately disambiguates from a purchase or guaranteed quote, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like dataset_* and enquiry_fields.

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?

It gives explicit when-to-use instructions via a two-step process: step 1 with answers and consent=true, then step 2 only if the person agrees, and clearly states it is not a purchase. No alternatives are needed given the sibling set.

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