gov.osha-inspections

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. It discloses it's a search tool that reads historical data, but omits details on pagination (offset/limit exist), rate limits, data freshness, or whether filters are exact or fuzzy. 'Raw OData filter clauses' suggests advanced filtering but no syntax is clarified.

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 efficient wording: first states purpose and source, second lists filters. No redundant information, front-loaded with key actions.

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?

No output schema and 9 parameters (0 required). Description covers overall purpose and main filters but lacks return format, pagination behavior, available fields, and rate limits. For a tool with this complexity, more details are needed.

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%, so description must compensate. It explains 'state', 'city', 'zip', 'estabName', and 'filter' broadly, but leaves 'sort', 'fields', 'limit', 'offset' undefined. Users cannot infer correct values for undocumented parameters.

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 it searches OSHA inspection records, specifies the data source (US Department of Labor Open Data Portal), mentions scale (~5M historical inspections), and lists filter types. It distinguishes from siblings like gov.osha-accidents by being inspections-specific.

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?

It implies usage scenarios by mentioning filters (location, establishment name, OData clauses) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool instead of siblings or provide when-not-to-use guidance. No prerequisites or alternatives are mentioned.

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