answer_printer_question

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It gives only the question scope and domains; it does not state whether this is read-only, what data source it uses, whether authentication or printer access is required, how uncertainty is handled, or what the answer format is.

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?

It is a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. The examples are compact and directly clarify the intended question types.

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 two-parameter Q&A tool, the description is enough to identify the basic call pattern and question domains. With no annotations and no output schema, however, it leaves gaps around return format, limitations, and how this differs from alternative diagnostic or material-question tools.

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 implies that printer_id selects one printer and that question should be a single question in the listed domains, but it does not specify printer_id format or question constraints.

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 a specific verb and resource: answer one question about one printer. It also names useful question domains (hardware facts, thermal-runaway protection, screw locations), but it does not explicitly distinguish this from nearby siblings such as answer_material_question or troubleshoot_printer.

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 examples imply the kinds of questions this tool is for, and the one-question/one-printer scope is clear. However, there is no explicit when-to-use guidance versus alternatives, and no stated exclusions or prerequisites.

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