Get Application Steps

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose two useful traits: steps are sequentially ordered and links are verified official portals. It omits expected behavior for invalid or unknown scheme_id, and says nothing about response shape or completeness.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the resource and its key qualifiers, no filler and no repetition of the tool name.

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?

For a simple single-parameter read tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description conveys what the caller gets back (ordered steps and verified links). Only error/not-found behavior is left unaddressed.

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 100% and there is only one parameter, whose schema description already gives format and examples ('pm-kisan'). The description adds no syntax or constraint detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (retrieve) and a well-defined resource: sequential ordered application instructions plus verified official portal links for a government scheme. An agent can distinguish this from get_scheme or get_deadline, though it never names a sibling to sharpen the contrast.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no conditions, and no mention of alternatives among the five sibling tools. The purpose implies a context (after identifying a scheme you need application steps), but the agent must infer it.

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