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 explaining behavior. It only states what the tool is ('the first question') rather than what it does or returns, and it does not disclose side effects, session state, or expected response format.

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 repetition. It is front-loaded with the key identification of the tool as the first question of the guide, making it easy to scan.

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, the description is minimally adequate but not fully complete. It gives enough to infer the tool's role, but it does not describe the return value, how it connects to checker_answer, or what the agent should expect after calling it.

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 and 100% schema description coverage, so there is nothing for the description to clarify about parameters. The baseline for a no-parameter tool is appropriate here.

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 HMO licence checker decision guide and its first question, which distinguishes it from checker_answer and checker_tree as the entry point. It lacks an explicit verb like 'returns' or 'starts', but the meaning is reasonably clear from the name and title.

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 word 'first question' implies this tool should be used at the beginning of the HMO licence checker flow. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this over checker_answer or how to proceed afterward, leaving the usage context mostly inferred.

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