Census County Business Patterns

get_state_business_summary

Get state-level business pattern summary.

Returns aggregate establishment, employment, and payroll data for an
entire state, optionally filtered by industry. Useful for state-level
economic overviews in grant applications.

Args:
    state: Two-letter state abbreviation (e.g. 'CA', 'TX', 'NY').
    naics_code: NAICS 2017 industry code to filter by (e.g. '72' for
        Accommodation/Food, '62' for Healthcare). Omit for all industries.
    year: Data year (default 2021). Available: 2012-2021.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`year`	No
`state`	Yes
`naics_code`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It explains the tool returns data via 'Returns aggregate...' and details the optional filtering. It does not mention side effects or error conditions, but for a read-only query tool this is sufficient.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is concise with two summary sentences and an Args section. Every sentence adds value; no fluff. Structure is clear and easy to read.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the existence of an output schema (not provided) and the tool's simplicity, the description covers the return type and parameter logic. It is complete enough, though could mention potential missing data for invalid states.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description fully compensates by explaining each parameter: state with examples, naics_code with industry code examples, year with default and range. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states it retrieves state-level business pattern summaries with aggregate establishment, employment, and payroll data, optionally filtered by industry. This directly distinguishes it from sibling tools that operate at county level or compare counties.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description mentions usefulness for 'state-level economic overviews in grant applications' and implies when to use (state aggregation). It does not explicitly state when not to use or provide alternatives, but the sibling tool names naturally differentiate usage levels.

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

All Census County Business Patterns tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct granularity: compare_county_industries focuses on a breakdown of all industries in a single county, get_county_business_patterns provides county-level data with optional industry filters (including totals for all industries), and get_state_business_summary offers state-level aggregates. Descriptions clearly differentiate their use cases.

Naming Consistency4/5

All tool names use a verb_noun pattern (compare_county_industries, get_county_business_patterns, get_state_business_summary). The only minor inconsistency is the use of 'compare' vs. 'get', but the pattern is otherwise uniform and readable.

Tool Count5/5

With only 3 tools, the set is focused and well-scoped for the Census County Business Patterns domain. Each tool provides essential functionality (state-level, county-level with filtering, and full industry breakdown), and no tool seems redundant or unnecessary.

Completeness5/5

The tools cover the core operations needed for business patterns data: state summary, county-level data with optional industry filtering, and a comprehensive industry breakdown for a county. The ability to retrieve all counties in a state via get_county_business_patterns adds flexibility, and the year parameter allows time-series access. No obvious gaps for the stated purpose of grant narratives.

Resources

Need Help?