Search DOL Foreign Labor Disclosure Data

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that the first call downloads and caches (slow), subsequent calls hit cache (fast). It also explains that certain visa programs are inappropriate for certain queries. However, it does not explicitly state if the tool is read-only or has side effects beyond caching, which is mostly 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 relatively long but well-structured. It front-loads the main purpose and routing instructions, then provides performance notes. Every sentence adds value, though it could be slightly more concise without losing clarity.

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?

Given 11 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the tool's functionality, usage guidance, performance characteristics, and parameter hints. It does not explicitly describe the output format, but mentions 'matching records' and cache format. It is fairly complete for this complexity level.

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%, but the description adds significant value beyond the schema. It explains the meaning of visaProgram values (agriculture, non-agriculture, etc.), warns about first-call timeout, and clarifies that maxItems=0 means no cap. This helps the agent select and invoke correctly.

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 stream-searches and normalizes DOL OFLC disclosure records across LCA, PERM, H-2A, H-2B, and CW programs. It distinguishes from siblings by specifying when to use which visa program, and explicitly warns not to use for general restaurant research, directing to places_search instead.

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 provides explicit routing instructions by visa program (e.g., 'H-2A is AGRICULTURAL seasonal labor... never use H-2B for farms'), tells when not to use (e.g., restaurants), and suggests narrowing parameters (maxItems, employerName, etc.) to avoid first-call timeouts. It also mentions that first call is slow and subsequent calls are fast.

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