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

With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden, and it does explain what a returned item contains (state/DC name plus governing statute). It does not mention auth, caching, or whether the list is static, but for a zero-parameter read-only enumerator those gaps are minor.

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?

Two sentences, no filler. The scope ('every US state and the District of Columbia') and returned data are front-loaded, with usage guidance following immediately.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must convey what comes back, and it does: jurisdiction names plus the governing statute. Combined with the explicit hand-off to get_state, nothing an agent needs to call this correctly is missing.

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 takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4; the description correctly implies no filtering or input is required. There is no parameter information it could add beyond 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 states a specific verb and resource ('List every US state and the District of Columbia') and adds the payload each entry carries (the governing refusal-of-anatomical-gift statute). It is trivially distinguishable from siblings like get_state, get_pricing, or search_site.

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?

It names two concrete uses ('to find which jurisdictions are covered' and 'to get the exact name to pass to get_state'), explicitly routing the agent to the sibling it complements. That is precise when-to-use guidance rather than implied context.

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