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

Discloses that it returns matching documents with title, type, agencies, abstract, and links. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries full burden; it adequately conveys read-only behavior but does not mention pagination or rate limits, which are minor omissions.

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?

Three concise sentences: purpose, filters, return format and use case. No redundant information. Front-loaded with the core verb-noun pair. Each sentence earns its place.

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?

Covers purpose, filters, return format, and use case. Links to the agencies tool for slug discovery. Lacks mention that the 'term' parameter is optional (though schema shows no required params) and does not explain per_page limits beyond the schema. Still highly informative for a search tool.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description lists the main filter parameters but adds no additional detail beyond the schema's descriptions. It mentions that agency slugs come from the 'agencies' tool, which is helpful context but not critical.

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?

Description clearly states the tool searches the US Federal Register for regulations and notices, with specific filters (keyword, document type, agency, date). It includes a use case 'what did agency X publish about topic Y' that distinguishes it from sibling tools like recent_documents or agencies.

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?

Describes when to use (searching with filters, finding documents by agency/topic) and references the agencies tool for slugs. Does not explicitly state when not to use, but the sibling tools imply alternatives (e.g., use recent_documents for a feed, document for a single record).

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