get_filing_distribution

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether the tool is read-only, whether results are paginated, or any authentication requirements. For a data retrieval tool, this is a significant gap.

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 three short, front-loaded sentences with no filler. Every sentence adds value: purpose, filters, and usage guidance. Ideal conciseness.

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?

The tool has 4 optional parameters and no output schema. The description explains the tool's purpose and when to use it, but does not describe the return format or field names. For a simple aggregation, this is mostly 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?

All parameters have descriptions in the input schema, so the baseline is 3. The description adds a summary ('Filter by agency and date range') but omits entity_type and does not explain how date range filters work. No additional semantics beyond the 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?

The description clearly states the tool gets a filing count distribution by filing type, with filtering options. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_filing_detail (single filing) and get_filing_trends (time-based trends). The verb 'Get' plus resource 'filing distribution' is specific.

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 includes the explicit usage cue 'Use for questions about what types of filings are most common', which helps the agent select this tool over similar ones. However, it does not mention when not to use it or contrast with alternatives like search_filings.

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