describe_datasetFree, no API key required. Describes the US WARN Act layoff dataset: what a WARN notice is, which states are covered, how many notices and workers, per-state freshness, known coverage gaps, the schema of a record, and how to obtain an API key. Returns no records. Call this before search_layoff_notices to decide whether the data is useful.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the tool's non-data-returning behavior ('Returns no records'), mentions per-state freshness and coverage gaps, and notes the API key process. This gives an honest picture of an informational, read-only tool.
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 just two sentences, front-loads the most important access info ('Free, no API key required'), and packs the tool's scope into a compact list. Every phrase earns its place without padding.
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 zero-parameter informational tool with no output schema, this description is complete: it explains what the tool returns, what topics it covers, and where it fits in the workflow before search_layoff_notices. No missing critical context.
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 tool has zero parameters and 100% schema description coverage, so there are no parameters to explain. According to the baseline for zero-parameter tools, the description need not add parameter detail; the score of 4 reflects that.
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 a specific action ('Describes') and a specific resource ('US WARN Act layoff dataset'), then enumerates exactly what content is covered. It also distinguishes itself from search_layoff_notices by explicitly saying it 'Returns no records.'
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 gives direct sequencing guidance: 'Call this before search_layoff_notices to decide whether the data is useful.' It also signals no authentication prerequisite with 'Free, no API key required.' It does not explicitly discuss the sibling layoff_coverage_stats, but the context is clear enough.
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.
Each tool has a distinct purpose: one describes the dataset, one provides coverage/freshness stats, and one performs the actual search. There is no overlap or ambiguity between them.
All names use snake_case and are descriptive, with two following a verb_noun pattern (describe_dataset, search_layoff_notices). layoff_coverage_stats is a noun phrase rather than a verb-led name, but it is still clear and consistent in style.
Three tools are well-scoped for a single dataset server, covering dataset explanation, coverage/freshness, and search. Each tool earns its place without redundancy.
The core workflow of describing, checking coverage, and searching WARN layoff notices is covered. A minor gap is the lack of a record-fetch-by-ID or export tool, but search returns structured records with provenance keys, so the domain is essentially complete.