acknowledge_risk_disclosure

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

Description says 'Creates an auditable timestamp' (mutation), but annotations declare readOnlyHint: true, which is a contradiction. The description does disclose the behavior, but the annotation conflict severely undermines transparency.

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?

Two sentences, no fluff. First sentence states purpose, second details requirement and effect. Extremely concise and well-structured.

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 simple one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the prerequisite and effect. However, the annotation contradiction creates a gap in expected behavior, reducing completeness.

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 single parameter's description is already in the schema, but the tool description adds critical context: the text must match exactly what start_onboarding() shows. This adds value beyond the schema.

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?

Clearly states the tool acknowledges a risk disclosure to unlock trading tools. It specifies the exact text requirement from start_onboarding. However, it does not differentiate from sibling 'accept_subscriber_terms'.

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?

Explicitly instructs the user to provide the exact acknowledgment text from start_onboarding. No exclusions or alternatives are given, but the context is clear for a single-purpose tool.

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