setup_answer

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

Annotation contradiction: the description says 'Records the user's answer' which indicates a write/side-effect, while annotations declare readOnlyHint=true. That creates direct conflicting signals about whether this tool mutates session or wizard state. The description also shares validation behavior and returning a next step, but the contradiction dominates.

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 concise sentences front-load the core action and return behavior while giving relevant validation examples. No filler or redundant restating of the tool name or schema.

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?

Describes the flow (record, validate, return next question/null), mentions the 8-question limit, and indicates failure conditions via live validation. Because there is an output schema, return types need not be fully spelled out; a small gap is the missing detail on error behavior when riddances validation fails.

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 adds meaning only for one parameter: 'answer' picks the answer for the current wizard question. It does not explain session_id at all, its structure, or how it controls the wizard state. The description does not compensate for the total lack of schema descriptions.

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?

Describes a specific action (records the user's answer), a clear resource (the current wizard question), and the follow-up behavior (returns next question or null after all 8). This distinguishes it from sibling setup tools like setup_start or setup_apply, even without naming them.

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 clearly scopes use to an interactive 8-question wizard: call it when the user answers the current question, validate, then continue until the final answer is reached. It does not explicitly compare against alternatives like setup_start or setup_apply, so no exclusions are given.

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