license.trades

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the current scope (TX TDLR) and return fields (type, number, names, expiration). However, it does not mention whether the operation is read-only, rate limits, or any other behavioral traits beyond basic functionality.

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 two sentences with no fluff. The first sentence establishes domain and examples; the second lists query methods and output fields. Information is front-loaded and every sentence serves a purpose.

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?

For a straightforward license lookup tool, the description covers input methods and return fields. It explains coverage (TX TDLR) and examples. However, it omits mentioning pagination parameters (limit, offset) and that state is required, though these are in the schema.

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 coverage is low (29%), but the description adds meaning by summarizing query methods (by name, licenseNumber, licenseType, county) and noting partial matching. For licenseType it gives an example ('Electrician'). This provides clarity beyond the sparse schema descriptions.

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 the tool's purpose: US trade/occupational license verification, currently focusing on Texas TDLR trades. It lists specific examples (electricians, A/C techs, etc.) and distinguishes from sibling license tools (e.g., license.broker, license.medical) by specifying the domain.

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 implies usage by listing search methods (by name, licenseNumber, etc.) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide conditions. The sibling tools are different license types, so the context is somewhat clear, but explicit guidance is missing.

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