hr__start_here

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly states the tool 'takes no arguments' and describes its behavior as explaining and pointing, implying a read-only informational action. It does not discuss side effects or output format, but for such a simple tool this is adequate.

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 extremely concise: three short phrases, each earning its place. 'Start here' is front-loaded, followed by the tool's purpose and argument clarification. There is no filler or redundant information.

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-argument, no-output-schema orientation tool, this description is complete. It tells the agent what the tool does, that it requires no arguments, and how it guides the user. Nothing essential is missing for invoking it correctly.

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 schema already shows zero properties, but the description reinforces this by explicitly stating 'Takes no arguments.' Since there are no parameters, the description adds the needed semantic confirmation beyond the schema, warranting the baseline 4 for zero-parameter 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 a clear purpose: it is an entry point that 'Explains what this demo is and points you at the guided menu.' This uses a specific verb/resource combination and clearly distinguishes the tool from the sibling HR, finance, ops, and corp tools, which are all operational rather than orientation tools.

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?

'Start here' is an explicit directive to invoke this tool first, which is strong usage guidance for an entry-point tool. It does not name alternatives or specify when not to use it, but given the tool's simple orientation role and zero arguments, the guidance is sufficient.

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