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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It only says this is the first question; it does not state whether calling the tool resets guide state, returns a question payload, requires prior setup, or is idempotent. An agent cannot predict side effects or the nature of the response.

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 a single sentence with no filler, and it places the actionable role ('first question') right at the start. It is as concise as it could be while still conveying purpose.

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 annotations, the description must explain what the caller receives or what happens after invocation. It only identifies the step position in a guide, leaving the return value, state effects, and relationship to subsequent tools unexplained.

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 has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so there is nothing for the description to add about parameter meaning. The baseline of 4 is appropriate for a parameterless tool.

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 identifies the tool as the entry point to the 'What can your business apply for?' decision guide, using 'first question' to convey a specific role. It is distinguishable from siblings like checker_answer and submit_enquiry, though it could more explicitly state that it initializes or fetches the starting question.

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 phrasing 'first question' implies the tool should be called when beginning the decision guide, but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention any alternative flow. The sibling names suggest checker_answer or checker_tree might be used after starting, but this routing is not spelled out.

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