council_answer

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses a key trait—this tool never reveals the model—and explains why council_poll omits content. However, it does not describe error cases or behavior if called before a hat is done, though the simple fetch nature makes this less critical.

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, front-loaded with the core purpose and immediate usage condition. Every phrase earns its place—no filler, no repetition of schema field names beyond necessary context.

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?

The tool is simple (2 params, no output schema, no nested objects), and the description covers purpose, trigger condition, and a key non-behavior (model secrecy). It could mention where to obtain council_id, but the workflow context with council_poll makes the description sufficiently complete.

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%, so the description must compensate. It explains 'hat' as a blind label with an example ('hat2') and ties it to 'status=done in council_poll'. It does not explain 'council_id', but the name and context make its role inferable. Partial compensation, not full.

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 uses a specific verb ('Fetch') and resource ('ONE seat's FULL answer text') with a clear identifier ('blind hat label'). It explicitly distinguishes itself from council_poll by stating it retrieves content council_poll omits, and from model-revealing tools by noting 'Never reveals the model.'

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Call once a hat shows status=done in council_poll.' It also implies when not to use (before done) and references council_poll as the alternative that omits content, plus a clear exclusion ('Never reveals the model').

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