Get client intake questionnaire

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

With no annotations, description carries full burden. It discloses the output is a structured brief skeleton that needs to be filled, and implies no side effects (read-only). Provides useful behavioral context beyond the name and schema.

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?

Three sentences, no wasted words. First sentence states purpose and contents, second gives actionable workflow, third emphasizes value. Well-structured and focused.

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 only 1 parameter and no output schema, the description fully explains what the tool returns, how to use it, and its role in the larger process. No gaps for the agent to guess.

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 has 100% coverage with enum descriptions. The description indirectly references formats by saying 'ask-through script' (implies markdown) but doesn't explicitly tie parameter values to use cases. Decent but could be more direct.

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 it returns a structured intake for use before designing, listing content areas (company facts, audience/goals, etc.). The verb 'return' and resource 'intake brief' are specific, and the purpose is distinct from sibling tools like get_template or get_design_playbook.

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 says to use 'BEFORE designing' and provides sequential steps: ask client, fill skeleton, feed answers to generate_theme and page copy. Explains why it's important ('makes each site specific'). No sibling comparisons but clear context.

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