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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It reveals that the tool is the first question in a guide, but does not describe whether repeated calls create sessions, whether any state is managed, or what exact output the agent should expect beyond being a question.

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, short sentence with no filler words. It front-loads the key information about the tool's position in the decision guide 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?

Given the very low complexity of a zero-parameter starting tool and the lack of annotations or output schema, the one-sentence description is nearly complete. It identifies the tool as the entry point of the guide, though adding a note about return value or follow-up steps would make it fully self-contained.

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, so the baseline is 4 and no parameter documentation is needed. The description adds the relevant meaning that this is the starting question, which is sufficient 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 first question' of the Workplace recycling duty checker decision guide, making its role as the entry point clear. It does not use an imperative verb like 'starts', but the title and description together communicate the function and distinguish it from siblings like checker_answer and 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 phrase 'first question' implies this tool should be used at the beginning of the decision guide, giving some contextual guidance. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives such as checker_answer or checker_tree as follow-up options.

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