Ask Government Data

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry the full burden. The description only states it routes questions but does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether it is read-only, whether it makes multiple API calls, or any side effects. The agent lacks safety cues.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence of 22 words that clearly communicates the tool's core function. Every word adds value, and there is no redundancy or fluff.

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 complex routing tool that delegates to multiple sources, the description provides only a high-level overview. It lacks details on output format, routing logic, or constraints. However, given the absence of an output schema and annotations, it is minimally adequate.

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 has 100% coverage with clear descriptions for all three parameters (question, dryRun, maxResults). The tool description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so 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's purpose: routing a plain-English question to the correct government data source (WHD, OSHA, DOL foreign-labor/LCA, SAM.gov). The verb 'route' and specific resource list make it distinct from sibling tools that target individual sources.

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 when a user has a general question not specific to a single source, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus the many sibling tools (e.g., whd_enforcement_query, lca_search). No 'when not to use' guidance is provided.

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