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 a structural role and does not disclose what happens when called, what the agent receives, whether any state is initialized, or how progression to the next step works.

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 that immediately identifies the tool's position in the guide. There is no filler or redundant wording; every word contributes meaning.

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 entry point, the description is minimally viable, but because there is no output schema and no annotations, it should at least indicate what the agent will receive from calling the tool or what starting the guide entails. It stops just short of being fully actionable.

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, so the input schema fully defines the invocation contract. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, but none is needed for a parameterless tool.

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 identifies the tool as the entry point to the 'Which council handles it?' decision guide and specifies that it is the first question, which helps separate it from siblings like checker_answer and checker_tree. It lacks an explicit verb such as 'returns' or 'starts,' but the intent is clear.

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?

Usage is implied by the phrase 'first question': an agent can infer this is the starting step of the guide. However, the description gives no explicit guidance about when to choose this over checker_answer, checker_tree, or the enquiry tools, and does not mention exclusions.

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