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 behavioral disclosure. It says the tool is 'the first question' but does not explain whether calling it starts a session, returns a prompt, resets previous progress, or has any side effects. This is a notable gap for a tool that initiates a decision guide.

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, focused sentence with no filler or redundant detail. It immediately conveys the tool's role in the checker flow and earns its place.

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 starting tool, the description is mostly sufficient: an agent can infer that calling this tool begins the checker and presents the first question. It does not describe the return payload or state behavior, but the simplicity of the tool reduces the impact of those omissions.

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 the schema has 100% description coverage, so there is nothing for the description to add about parameters. The baseline of 4 applies because with no parameters, parameter semantics are effectively complete by definition.

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 starting point of the Landlord registration and licensing checker decision guide, giving the resource and its position in the flow. It distinguishes itself from siblings like checker_answer and checker_tree by signaling that this is the first question, though it lacks a strong action verb like 'starts' or 'displays'.

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 phrase 'first question' implies this tool should be used at the beginning of the checker flow, which gives some usage context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives such as checker_answer for subsequent questions, leaving the routing partly to inference.

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