get_business_awardsGet selected-hot award history for the confirmed profile UEI with explicit coverage limits.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds some context about the 'confirmed profile UEI' and 'explicit coverage limits,' but the meaning of 'selected-hot' is unclear and no additional behavioral details such as return format or pagination are disclosed.
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 sentence and reasonably short, but it is not optimally clear due to jargon like 'selected-hot' and 'confirmed profile UEI.' It is concise in length but sacrifices clarity, and the awkward phrasing prevents it from being a model of efficient communication.
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?
With no output schema, the description should clarify what the returned award history contains, but it does not. It also leaves 'selected-hot' and the selection criteria unexplained, so the tool's behavior is incomplete for an agent trying to invoke 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?
The input schema documents the single 'limit' parameter with default, minimum, and maximum, but the description's vague 'explicit coverage limits' adds no meaningful parameter semantics. With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate, but it does not clearly explain the parameter or its effect.
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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('award history') scoped to the connected business/confirmed profile UEI, which makes the core purpose understandable. However, the phrase 'selected-hot' is ambiguous and the description does not explicitly differentiate this from sibling award-related tools like get_vendor_awards or search_awards.
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?
No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_vendor_awards, get_award, or search_awards. The description gives context ('confirmed profile UEI') but no exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative recommendations.
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.
Most tools have clear boundaries (e.g., get_award vs search_awards, get_business_profile vs get_vendor). Some overlap exists in pairs like find_recompetes/find_recompetes_for_business and search_opportunities/search_opportunities_for_business, though the latter are differentiated by profile context.
All tools follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern (get_, search_, update_, watch_, save_, etc.) with no stylistic deviations. Naming is highly predictable across the entire set.
At 39 tools, the surface is excessively large. While the domain is broad, many tools could be combined or parameterized (e.g., get_business_awards and get_vendor_awards, multiple search variants). This creates overhead for agents and dilutes focus.
The tool set covers the core lifecycle: opportunity/award searching and retrieval, business profile updates, saved searches, watches, exclusions, and reference data. Minor gaps such as award amendments or more granular exclusion handling exist, but the surface is fundamentally complete.