run_full_agentic_onboarding

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden and does well by disclosing key behavioral traits: it describes the multi-stage orchestration, partial failure handling ('On partial failure, returns failed_stage, retry_hint, and completed stages'), and specific requirements ('clarifying_questions must have exactly 3 items', 'pass valid schema payloads'). It doesn't mention authentication needs, rate limits, or idempotency, but covers the core execution behavior adequately.

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 efficiently structured with zero waste: first sentence states the core purpose, second specifies the target user, bullet list outlines the orchestrated stages, requirements section highlights critical constraints, and final sentence explains error handling. Every sentence earns its place, and information is front-loaded appropriately.

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 tool's high complexity (16 parameters, multi-stage orchestration, no annotations) but presence of an output schema, the description is reasonably complete. It explains the orchestration flow, requirements, and error handling well. The output schema will document return values, so the description appropriately focuses on execution behavior rather than return format. It could potentially mention authentication context given the sibling tools include login/logout functions.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage and 16 parameters (10 required), the description compensates significantly by explaining the purpose of key parameters: clarifying_questions must have exactly 3 items, and artifacts/targeting require valid schema payloads. It also implicitly explains parameters through the staged flow description (e.g., clarifying_questions/answers relate to clarifications stage). While not covering all 16 parameters individually, it provides crucial semantic context missing from the schema.

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: 'Execute the full staged onboarding flow end-to-end in one call.' It specifies the exact sequence of stages orchestrated (prompt-pack version, clarifications, conversation, artifact validation, targeting submit, readiness snapshot) and distinguishes it from sibling tools by emphasizing it's for 'zero-context agents that want a safe default path' rather than using individual stage tools.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool: 'Intended for zero-context agents that want a safe default path.' This provides clear guidance that this is an all-in-one alternative to using individual onboarding stage tools (like submit_onboarding_artifacts, submit_agent_targeting, etc.), helping the agent choose between comprehensive vs. granular approaches.

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