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

No annotations, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the default 12-month window and that changes without announced amounts are included—useful behavioral context. However, it omits read-only confirmation (though obvious), result ordering, and pagination.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with the core purpose and default, with no wasted words. Every clause adds relevant information.

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 query tool with no output schema and moderate parameter count, the description covers the date default, filtering, and special inclusion of unannounced changes. Output format isn't described, but not strictly required since no output schema exists; still, an agent might want to know result shape.

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 80%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning beyond the schema: it states the from/to default (next 12 months) and clarifies that state and level are optional filters. include_variants is left to the schema, which is acceptable given the high coverage.

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 resource (scheduled minimum wage changes) and scope (between two dates, optional state/level filters). Implicitly distinguishes from sibling minimum_wage by focusing on changes over time rather than current rates, though it does not name the alternative explicitly.

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?

Implies use when querying changes over a date range, but gives no explicit when-to-use vs minimum_wage or other siblings, and no exclusions. The default window is helpful but selection guidance is absent.

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