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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of explaining behavior. It does disclose the nature of the return data and the conditional presence of options. However, it does not describe the response format, whether the data is static, or any access considerations, leaving some behavioral context implicit.

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?

Two sentences, no filler. The first sentence front-loads what the tool returns, and the second adds actionable integration guidance. Every sentence earns its place.

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 zero-parameter introspection tool with no output schema, the description thoroughly covers the return content and how to apply it. It names the relevant sibling submit_enquiry and explains the keying contract. Nothing critical is missing given the tool's low complexity.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the schema is trivially complete. The description appropriately focuses on the output rather than parameters, and no parameter semantics are needed.

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 and resource: it lists every field of the Texas HVAC Replacement Cost enquiry, enumerating the exact attributes returned (key, label, type, required, help text, options). This clearly distinguishes it from submit_enquiry, which consumes answers, and from the vague sibling enquiry_describe.

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 second sentence gives clear practical guidance: pass answers to submit_enquiry keyed by field key. This tells an agent how to use the output correctly, though it does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over enquiry_describe or mention exclusions.

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