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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the burden. 'Returns every endpoint needed' discloses the return content and the ordered steps hint at behavior, but it omits whether the call is read-only, whether it requires auth, and how the endpoints relate to the sibling tools.

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 tight clauses with no waste. The ordered path is front-loaded, and the return summary follows. Slightly cryptic wording ('relay, reside, fund') costs a point but overall efficient.

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, the description must explain what comes back; 'Returns every endpoint needed' is minimal and doesn't describe structure or count. For a zero-param bootstrap entry point it is adequate but leaves the agent guessing about the shape and scope of the response.

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. Schema coverage is 100% and there is nothing for the description to compensate for, though listing the ordered steps ('read, decide, register...') loosely maps to the sequence of sibling calls.

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 conveys that this is an ordered entry/onboarding path and that it returns endpoints. It's reasonably specific about what the tool is for, though it doesn't explicitly name itself a discovery/start-here tool distinct from the sibling getters. An agent can infer the purpose but must read between the lines.

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 phrase 'Ordered entry path' implies this should be called first, but there is no explicit when-to-use statement, no mention of alternatives like get_constitution or get_habitat, and no prerequisites. Usage is implied rather than stated.

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