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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavior itself. It states exactly what information will be returned for each field and implies a read-only listing operation. It does not discuss edge cases like missing help text or response format, but for a simple introspection tool this is adequate.

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 two sentences, front-loads the tool's purpose, and ends with a useful workflow note. There is no redundant wording.

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?

Given no parameters and no output schema, the description provides enough detail about what fields are included and how the output connects to submit_enquiry. An agent can invoke and use the result without additional assumptions.

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 no parameters, so the description has nothing to explain about parameters. It adds value by explaining that the output's key field is meant to be used with submit_enquiry, which is useful contextual semantics.

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 providing every field of the Employer Cost Calculator enquiry, including key, label, type, required flag, help text, and options. It is specific about the resource and content, though it does not explicitly name sibling enquiry_describe as a contrast.

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 description gives a clear usage pointer: obtain the fields and then pass answers to submit_enquiry keyed by field key. It does not describe exclusions or compare with enquiry_describe, but the intended workflow is evident.

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