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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the tool's focus on federal contracts, the meaning of expiring contracts (upcoming recompetes), and that responses include data-freshness and coverage caveats. This adds value beyond the schema, though it does not elaborate on authorization or rate limits.

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 concise paragraph that front-loads the purpose, then gives usage guidance and an example. No word is wasted; every sentence serves a distinct informative purpose.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description must cover return fields. It mentions incumbent vendor, dollar values, contracting office, and data-freshness caveats. This is sufficient for a tool of moderate complexity, though it could include pagination or sort order details.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description enhances schema info with a concrete example (agency='DHS', naics_code='541512', window_days=90) and explains the 'limit' parameter sorts by obligated amount. This adds practical clarity for parameter usage.

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 finds expiring federal contracts for sales triggers, specifying the return fields (incumbent vendor, dollar values, contracting office). This distinguishes it from siblings like agency_spend_profile or incumbent_lookup, which have different purposes.

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 explicitly says 'Use this when prospecting or prepping a federal account and you want sales triggers' and provides example queries. It also notes 'Federal only (no state/local)'. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or provide alternatives, though the context is clear.

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