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

The description adds significant behavioral context beyond the annotations, detailing the data boundaries (2019-2026), the data source, and crucial error handling logic—specifically that out-of-range dates return `found:false` instead of throwing an error. It also confirms the tool is 'Keyless.'

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 highly efficient, front-loading the core purpose, followed by usage patterns, data constraints, and final operational details. Every sentence serves a distinct, valuable function.

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?

Given the clear scope, parameter usage instructions, and defined boundary/error conditions, the description is extremely complete for a read-only historical data retrieval tool.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, the description provides crucial high-level semantics that the schema lacks, specifying how the parameters should be grouped and used (e.g., 'a single `date`', 'a `start_date`/`end_date` range').

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 defines the purpose as retrieving 'Daily U.S. airport checkpoint screening counts.' It specifies the data source (TSA published figures) and distinguishes the tool's function as volume reporting.

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 provides clear instructions on how to utilize the parameters (single date, range, or year). While it does not explicitly state why this tool is preferred over the sibling 'tsa_checkpoint_stats,' it leaves no ambiguity regarding the operational logic.

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