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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, covering safety and repeatability. The description adds value by enumerating what the response includes (abbreviation codes, full names, metadata on calculation support and annual averages) and the effect of the optional filter, which is more than the schema alone. No contradictions found.

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 two sentences with zero filler. The primary action and output are front-loaded, followed by usage guidance and filter behavior. Every sentence earns its place, making it easy to scan.

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 simple list tool with one optional parameter and an output schema (mentioned in signals), the description covers the key aspects: what it returns, when to use it, and how to filter. No missing information that an agent would need to call it correctly.

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 100%, so the schema already documents the optional category parameter, including the enum values and the 'Omit to list all surveys' behavior. The description repeats the enum values and the narrowing effect, but adds no new semantic detail beyond what the schema provides, warranting the baseline score.

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 begins with 'List BLS survey programs' and immediately specifies the output: 'abbreviation codes, full names, and metadata about calculation support and annual averages.' It also contrasts with a sibling, 'before calling bls_search_series', making the tool's role in the workflow explicit.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool: 'Use to discover which survey covers a topic before calling bls_search_series.' It also describes the optional category filter as a narrowing mechanism, giving the agent clear direction for selection.

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