gov.fec-committee

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It states 'Search' implying read-only, but does not confirm read-only behavior, mention authentication needs, rate limits, pagination defaults, or what happens when no results are found. The description lacks sufficient behavioral context.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the purpose. It contains no unnecessary words. However, it could be improved by structuring the filter list more clearly (e.g., bullet points or separating parameter groups).

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 absence of an output schema and high parameter count (11 parameters with 0% schema coverage), the description is incomplete. It does not specify the return format, pagination behavior, or any defaults. The mention of 'OpenFEC' hints at the data source, but more detail is needed for comprehensive context.

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 description coverage is 0% for 11 parameters. The description only lists 9 parameter names but does not explain their meanings, allowed values, or defaults. The missing parameters 'page' and 'perPage' are not mentioned. The description adds minimal semantic value beyond the raw parameter names.

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 explicitly states the verb 'Search', identifies the resource 'US federal political committees', and lists committee types (PACs, super PACs, etc.) and the data source (OpenFEC). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like gov.fec-candidate or gov.fec-contributions.

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 lists filter parameters but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as gov.fec-contributions or gov.fec-expenditures. There is no mention of prerequisites, limitations, or preferred use cases.

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