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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only says this is the first question. It does not state whether calling it has side effects, what it returns, or how it relates to subsequent checker calls.

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 or extraneous detail. It is concise and immediately front-loads the tool's role, though it is somewhat thin on operational detail.

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 the parameterless schema, the description is a minimal viable summary, but with no output schema and no annotations it should also indicate what the tool returns or what the next step is. An agent can call it, but may not know what to expect back.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so the description has no parameter semantics to add. The baseline for a parameterless tool is 4 here, and nothing is missing.

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 first entry point of a named decision guide, which distinguishes it from later steps like checker_answer or checker_tree. It lacks an explicit action verb, but 'first question' conveys the tool's role.

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?

Calling this the 'first question' implies it should be used at the beginning of the decision guide, but there is no explicit guidance about when to use it versus siblings or what precedes or follows it. Usage is implied, not stated.

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