Measured DOHA timelines: median days from Statement of Reasons to hearing and to decision, from dates stated in the decisions themselves. Optionally scoped to one decision year.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| year | No | Optional decision year to scope to |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds meaningful context: the metrics are median days, and the data source is dates stated in decisions themselves. This explains core behavior beyond annotations.
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 with no wasted words. The first sentence states what the tool does and how, the second specifies the optional parameter. Perfectly concise and front-loaded.
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 read-only tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description adequately explains the output (median days for two durations) and scoping. It is complete for the tool's complexity, though return format could be slightly more explicit.
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% with the parameter 'year' having a description. The tool description adds 'Optionally scoped to one decision year,' but this is redundant with the schema description. Baseline 3 as description does not significantly enhance schema meaning.
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 returns measured DOHA timelines: median days from Statement of Reasons to hearing and to decision. It identifies the specific resource (DOHA timelines) and the action (retrieve). It implicitly distinguishes from siblings like get_statistics by being more specific, though no explicit differentiation is provided.
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 mentions optional scoping by decision year, which gives guidance on using the parameter. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_statistics or search_cases, nor does it provide when-not-to-use or prerequisites.
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 targets a distinct aspect of the DOHA case record: searching, fetching full case, finding similar cases, and four different statistical analyses (candor, conduct recency, timelines, overall statistics). There is no ambiguity between tool purposes.
Most tools use a 'get_' prefix, but 'search_cases' uses 'search_' and 'similar_cases' uses an adjective instead of a verb. This mix of conventions, while readable, lacks a consistent pattern.
Seven tools is well-scoped for the domain of exploring DOHA security clearance decisions. It covers both data retrieval (search, case fetch, similarity) and various descriptive statistics without being overwhelming.
The tool surface covers core operations: search, case detail, similarity, and key statistics. Minor gaps exist, such as no tool for listing all guidelines or judges, but these are not essential for the primary analysis purpose.