choose

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

With no annotations, the description fully explains the user experience (card with buttons, user selection, message appearance) and a critical behavioral rule: 'After calling this tool, you MUST stop and wait for the user's response.' This is essential for correct agent 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 front-loaded with the core purpose, includes usage guidance, behavioral instructions, and an example—all in a well-structured format. Every sentence is necessary and contributes to understanding.

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?

Although there is no output schema, the description sufficiently explains the outcome (user's choice appears as a message with an example). For a simple interactive tool, this covers all needed context.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds context about the user interface (card with buttons) but does not elaborate on parameter formats or constraints beyond the schema. Minor added value.

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's purpose with a specific verb+resource: 'Present the user with a set of options to choose from.' It is easily distinguishable from sibling tools, which are all GitHub-related, making selection unambiguous.

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?

Explicitly tells the agent when to use this tool ('when you need the user to make a decision between discrete alternatives') and provides a proactive alternative ('don't ask the user to type their choice in chat'). This gives clear context for usage.

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