state_fiscal_snapshot

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the data content, source (ABS GFS), and parameter behavior (omit for all eight jurisdictions). It does not describe return format or potential limitations, but for a read-only data query, it is adequately transparent.

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 three sentences, each adding value: what it returns, usage examples, and parameter guidance. No redundant phrases or unnecessary detail. The main action is front-loaded with 'Returns'.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must convey what the agent will get. It lists the key data points and source, and explains the parameter scope. It could specify whether data is annual or quarterly, but for a snapshot tool the listed metrics are sufficient for an agent to understand the return value.

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?

The schema description already fully explains the state parameter including the enum values and the omission behavior, achieving 100% schema coverage. The tool description reinforces this but adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 returns an AU state/territory fiscal snapshot with specific metrics (revenue, expenses, net operating balance, net debt). It provides example questions ('what's the fiscal position of <state>?') that distinguish it from broader tools like macro_snapshot_state. The verb 'Returns' and specific resource make the purpose unmistakable.

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 gives explicit usage scenarios: single-call answers about fiscal position or largest deficit, and explains how to use the state parameter (pass one state or omit for all). It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use, but the context is clear enough for an agent to decide when to invoke it.

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