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

With no annotations and no output schema, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only states what the tool is, not what happens when called. It does not say whether the tool returns a question, prompts the user, or has side effects, leaving the agent to infer the tool's runtime behavior.

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, front-loaded sentence with no redundant wording. It immediately establishes the tool's position in the decision guide without wasting tokens.

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?

The description is too sparse for an agent to know how to use the tool correctly in context. It does not explain what the returned question looks like, what the agent should do with the response, or how this connects to checker_answer and checker_tree, and there is no output schema or annotation to fill that gap.

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 there is nothing for the description to explain about parameter usage. Baseline 4 is appropriate because no parameter documentation is needed.

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 Which PDF to CSV route? decision guide,' which clearly establishes its role as the entry point of a specific decision flow. It is distinguishable from siblings like checker_answer and checker_tree by the 'first question' framing, though it lacks an explicit verb describing what invoking the tool actually does.

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 description conveys clear context that this tool is used at the beginning of the decision guide, since it is explicitly the 'first question.' It does not mention exclusions or alternative tools, but the 'first' positioning implicitly tells the agent to start here before using siblings like checker_answer.

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