discovery_question_bank

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

No annotations are provided, so the description fully bears the burden. It mentions that questions 'adapt based on what you already know', which hints at context-aware behavior, but does not disclose side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or what happens when parameters are missing. Critical behavioral details are absent.

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 purpose, no redundant words. Efficiently communicates the core function.

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?

Without output schema, the description does not explain what is returned (list of questions, formatted text, etc.). The tool has 8 parameters but only 1 required; the description doesn't cover edge cases or typical usage scenarios. Adequate but incomplete.

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% (all 8 parameters have descriptions). The description adds general context about adaptation but does not provide specific meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Get contextual discovery questions using MEDDPICC, BANT, SPICED, or custom frameworks.' It specifies the verb 'get' and resource 'discovery questions', and distinguishes from sibling tools that focus on other sales activities like strategy or plans.

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 implies usage during discovery conversations but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like deal_strategy_coach or account_plan_builder. No when-not-to-use or prerequisite conditions are stated.

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