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

Adds substantial context beyond annotations: counts refresh daily, no paging, read-only, limits follow the caller's key plan, and cannot fail on input. These go well beyond the readOnlyHint/openWorldHint annotations.

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?

Front-loads the core purpose, then layers usage, behavior, and constraints in tight sentences. No wasted words despite covering purpose, outputs, refresh cadence, paging, and limits.

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?

Complete for a zero-param enumeration tool, covering what it returns and how to use it. Minor gap: no explicit mention of the output shape/format (e.g., array of {code, count}) though the description implies it.

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 coverage is 100% and there are zero parameters, so baseline is 4. The description accurately notes it takes no parameters and that limits follow the caller's key plan, adding a small amount of relevant context.

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 (List) and resource (US states with live contract coverage) and scopes it to the GovContractScout dataset. Clearly distinguishes itself from search_contracts by noting it feeds state codes into that tool.

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?

Explicitly says to use the returned state codes in search_contracts, giving a clear when-to-use and downstream workflow. It also notes it takes no parameters, implicitly framing it as an enumeration helper rather than a search.

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