get_us_exports_by_stateOfficial U.S. Census Bureau export statistics for one U.S. state or territory (origin of movement): total exports for the last full year and year to date, rank among states, and the top destination countries and products.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| state | Yes | Two-letter state code (e.g. "TX") or state name (e.g. "Texas"). |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description need not repeat that. It adds value by specifying the data scope (origin of movement) and the specific statistics returned, which is useful behavioral context beyond the annotation.
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-structured sentence that front-loads the purpose ('Official U.S. Census Bureau export statistics') and then enumerates the output details without waste. Every part 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?
For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is complete. It covers what data is returned, the geographic scope, and the data source, leaving no critical gaps for an agent to know how to invoke it correctly.
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% for the single 'state' parameter, so the schema already explains the format. The description does not add extra semantic detail beyond what the schema provides, aligning with the baseline of 3 for high coverage.
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 returns official U.S. Census Bureau export statistics for a specific state or territory, listing the exact contents (totals, rank, top destinations/products). This distinguishes it from siblings like get_us_export_markets, which likely cover different angles.
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 for state-level export data but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool. There is no comparison to siblings such as get_us_export_markets or find_us_exporters, leaving the agent to infer based on the name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.