get_sample_household

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It thoroughly discloses key behavioral traits: PII removed, dollar amounts banded, trajectory truncated to 12 months, and projections withheld. This exceeds the minimum expectation and gives the agent a clear picture of what will and won't be returned.

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 no filler. The key limitation is front-loaded, followed by a precise list of valid archetypes. Every sentence earns its place and the description is easy to scan.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates well by describing the sample's degraded nature and the available archetype set. It doesn't describe the exact output structure, but the sibling describe_household_schema likely covers that, and the single required parameter is fully addressed.

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 100% and the parameter already includes an example and reference to list_archetypes, so the baseline is 3. The description adds extra value by explicitly enumerating the free archetype IDs available, which helps the agent choose a valid parameter without an additional call.

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 identifies the operation: 'Get one deliberately-insufficient sample household'. It distinguishes the tool from siblings by focusing on a sample household, while siblings handle schemas, benchmarks, reference parameters, and bundles. The list of free archetypes adds further specificity.

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 notes that only listed archetypes are free and that other archetypes are in the paid corpus, which gives some context on limits. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over siblings like get_planning_benchmark or list_archetypes, nor does it state any exclusion conditions beyond the free/paid distinction.

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