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

With no annotations and no output schema, the description carries the full disclosure burden and does so well by spelling out the returned field attributes (key, label, type, required, help text, allowed options). It omits any statement about ordering, count, or caching, but for a zero-parameter, side-effect-free metadata lookup the important behavior is covered.

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, front-loaded with the resource and then the payload contents, followed by the downstream usage note. Every enumerated attribute earns its place; there is no filler or repetition of the tool name.

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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description supplies precisely the missing piece: the shape of the return value and how its keys feed the sibling submit_enquiry. Nothing needed to call it correctly is absent.

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 (empty schema, 100% coverage), which is the baseline-4 case. The description's only parameter-like content concerns the downstream submit_enquiry payload keyed by 'field key', which is useful but outside this tool's schema.

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 the concrete resource (every field of the Cheap small business web design enquiry) and enumerates exactly what each entry contains (key, label, type, required, help text, options). It clearly separates itself from submit_enquiry, but gives no signal distinguishing it from the sibling enquiry_describe, so an agent still has to guess between those two.

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 closing sentence establishes a clear workflow: fetch this first, then 'Pass answers to submit_enquiry keyed by field key.' That tells the agent when the tool is useful without any explicit exclusions or a stated rule for choosing between this and enquiry_describe.

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