Get the lien rules for one state

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and clearly states what the tool returns, including specific content categories. It does not discuss side effects or authorization, but 'Returns' indicates a read-only lookup and the level of detail is sufficient for this simple getter.

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 clean sentences, no fluff, with the return content front-loaded and usage guidance follow-up. Every sentence earns its place.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description appropriately enumerates what the return value contains and gives enough routing guidance to invoke the correct tool. The schema handles the parameter requirement and sibling tools cover the surrounding context.

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 input schema already fully documents the single 'state' parameter with the two-letter US state code constraint, and schema description coverage is 100%. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond 'for a state,' so the baseline of 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 states a concrete action ('Returns the underlying deadline rules for a state') and enumerates the contents: statute citations, deadline table, and common questions. It also distinguishes itself from date-only tools by saying 'rather than just a date,' and the singular 'for a state' separates it from list_state_lien_guides.

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 context: use it when the user asks why a deadline falls where it does or wants the statute. It also implies the alternative is a date-only tool, but it does not name calculate_lien_deadline or list_state_lien_guides directly.

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