wealth_advisory_wealth_kyc_risk_intake

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

No annotations are provided. The description discloses that the tool uses JWT, tenant, and company scope for routing, but does not disclose what the action does (creates, reads, modifies, etc.). The behavioral traits of the underlying action are not described.

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 concise but front-loads an implementation detail (routing through dispatcher) that is not useful for tool selection. The Args section is well-structured but wastes space on that detail.

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 presence of an output schema, the description does not need to explain return values. However, it lacks behavioral disclosure, parameter guidance, and usage guidelines, leaving the tool underspecified for effective use.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%. The description labels 'message' as a free-text objective and 'inputs' as an optional JSON string, but provides no context on what constitutes a valid objective or what structured inputs are expected. This adds minimal meaning beyond the schema itself.

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 it runs the 'wealth_kyc_risk_intake' action but does not explain what this action does. The verb 'Run' is generic, and there is no clear verb+resource relationship. It is distinguishable from siblings only by domain prefix, but no differentiation is provided.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs other wealth_advisory tools or alternatives. The mention of routing through a dispatcher is an implementation detail, not usage direction.

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