form_checklist

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states 'Generate a checklist' with no disclosure of side effects, authentication needs, idempotency, or limitations. The 'DEMO' label hints at incomplete functionality but lacks specifics.

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 extremely short but fails to provide necessary detail; 'DEMO' adds no value. It is under-specified rather than concise, and the single sentence is not front-loaded with key information.

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 lack of annotations and output schema details, and 0% parameter documentation, the description is far from complete. It does not address parameter semantics, usage context, or behavioral traits, making it inadequate for agent 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%, requiring the description to compensate. It does not explain form_type or applicant_type at all, leaving the agent without any understanding of required inputs.

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 clearly states the tool generates a checklist for Kenya government forms/applications, using a specific verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like form_requirements_check or form_draft_letter, and the appended 'DEMO' may cause confusion about reliability.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as ecitizen_guide or huduma_centre_guide. There is no mention of context, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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