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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It adds that the tool asks or returns the first question, but it does not disclose whether invocation resets prior progress, creates a session, or has other side effects, which is important for a 'start' tool.

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?

One concise, front-loaded sentence communicates the main behavior without filler. 'Decision guide' is slightly redundant but does not harm clarity.

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 parameterless entry-point tool, the description is adequate: it signals that invocation returns the first question of the wizard. However, without an output schema or annotations, it should also clarify whether state is initialized/reset and how this connects to checker_answer; that context is missing.

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 description has no parameter semantics to add; this matches the baseline for parameterless tools.

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 states that this tool presents the first question of the Right to work check wizard, so an agent can infer it is the entry point for the wizard. It is not a tautology, but it does not explicitly say 'call this to begin/start' and relies partly on the title for that meaning.

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?

There is no guidance on when to call this tool versus siblings such as checker_answer or checker_tree. The description does not say to start here before answering, nor does it mention any conditions or alternatives.

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