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

With no annotations and no output schema, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It clearly indicates a read-only retrieval operation and enumerates the returned content: abstract, action, effective date, comment deadline, CFR references, citation, topics, agencies, and links. It could add error or format details, but the provided field list is substantial.

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 a single well-organized sentence that leads with the action and resource, includes a concrete example, and then lists the returned fields. Every part earns its place, and unnecessary filler is absent.

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, the description covers the tool's purpose, the required parameter, its provenance, and the expected return contents. The lack of an output schema is partly mitigated by the explicit field list, though exact formatting or error behavior is not described.

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?

The input schema already fully describes document_number with an example, so the baseline is 3. The description adds practical value by telling the agent exactly where to get a valid document number (search_documents or recent_documents), which helps parameter selection beyond 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 uses a specific verb ('Get') with a clear resource ('single Federal Register document') and a precise identifier method (document number). It naturally differentiates from siblings like search_documents and recent_documents, which retrieve lists or collections.

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 tells the agent to obtain the document number from search_documents or recent_documents, which gives clear context for when this tool is appropriate. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the single-document-by-number framing makes the intended use obvious.

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