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

Discloses that ambiguous agency fragments return no match, defines fiscal year boundaries, notes data freshness for civilian vs DoD, and states amounts are in USD. This goes well beyond the readOnlyHint/openWorldHint 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?

Four focused sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then usage, then data context. No wasted words.

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?

Though no output schema, the description specifies the return content (top vendors, top NAICS industries) and gives sufficient context on source, freshness, and units. Complete for a read-only, 2-param 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?

Schema already covers both parameters; description adds the rule that agency must resolve to a single toptier agency and explains fiscal year default and naming conventions, providing extra clarity beyond the schema.

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?

Clearly states it returns top vendors and top NAICS industries by obligated amount for a federal agency, using specific verbs (who sells, what buys). Distinct from siblings (expiring contracts, awards by company).

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?

Explicitly says 'Use it to answer who sells to an agency and what that agency buys,' and provides constraints on agency naming and fiscal year. Does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use, so a 4.

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