get_departments

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the disclosure burden. It confirms this is a bulk read returning 'all government departments', but says nothing about ordering, pagination, completeness, or auth. Adequate for a simple static lookup, but thin given zero annotation coverage.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose and usage before the Args/Returns sections. The 'Returns: List of all government departments' line largely restates the opening sentence, a minor redundancy, but overall structure is clean and scannable.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value detail is not required, and the tool is a simple one-optional-parameter lookup. Purpose, usage, and the lone parameter are covered; only the (unnecessary) absence of ordering/pagination notes leaves a small gap.

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 the description must compensate, and it does: it explains that name_contains is a partial/substring match and supplies concrete examples ('Treasury', 'Health'). This adds real semantics beyond the bare schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get list of all government departments') and immediately clarifies its domain role ('structure of government', 'which department handles specific policy areas'), which lets an agent distinguish it from adjacent reference tools like get_government_posts.

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?

Gives a clear use condition ('when you need to know the structure of government or which department handles specific policy areas') and points to related tools via 'See also: get_answering_bodies, get_government_posts'. It stops short of stating when NOT to use it or how to choose between the two siblings, so it is not a full 5.

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