next_drill

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses important behaviors: the choice is algorithmically determined, and the returned explanation must not be shown to the user unless they answer incorrectly. This is valuable beyond the schema, though it does not explicitly confirm read-only safety or side-effect-free behavior.

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 concise and well structured. It front-loads the primary purpose, adds a crucial usage directive, notes a key output behavior, and documents the parameter in a compact format. Every sentence earns its place without unnecessary fluff.

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 has only one parameter but no output schema, so the description should clarify return values. It does mention returning the element's explanation and the kind of question, but does not fully enumerate all response fields or their shapes. Given the tool's simplicity, this is a minor gap, and the overall description is largely complete for invocation.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds semantic meaning to the single parameter by stating 'session_id: From start_topic,' which tells the agent where to obtain the value. This goes beyond the schema's bare 'Session Id' label and provides useful origin context.

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 and resource: 'Get the next element to drill and the kind of question to ask about it.' It clearly identifies what the tool does and naturally distinguishes itself from siblings by focusing on 'next' and 'drill,' which aligns with the drill workflow.

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 provides clear usage context: 'take what you're given rather than picking a topic yourself.' It implicitly tells the agent when to use this tool (whenever a next drill item is needed) and even mentions the prerequisite session_id comes from start_topic. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives.

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