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 only states that this is the first question; it does not say whether calling it initializes a session, returns a question, or has any other effects.

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 concise sentence with no filler, and it front-loads the essential information about being the first question. It is under-specified in behavior, but structurally it is efficient.

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 starter tool, the description minimally conveys the entry-point role. However, with no annotations or output schema, it would benefit from saying what the caller should expect in the response and how to continue the guide using sibling tools.

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 does not need to explain parameter meaning. The baseline of 4 applies because there is nothing to document and the description does not interfere with that.

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 resource ('Indicative steel beam checker decision guide') and its role as the entry point ('first question'). It is clear but does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like checker_answer or checker_tree.

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' implies this tool should be used to start the decision guide, before checker_answer or checker_tree. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives, leaving the usage context mostly implied.

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