government_contracts_by_ticker

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. The description shows output structure but does not disclose behavior such as data freshness, rate limits, authentication needs, or whether results are paginated. Only mentions response formats (JSON/CSV).

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 somewhat cluttered: starts with a sentence fragment, then embeds a JSON-like sample. It includes useful output specification and CSV note, but could be more streamlined. Adequate but not concise.

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?

No output schema, so the sample output helps. However, missing details on pagination (limit up to 5000 suggests possible truncation), error handling, date range semantics, and relationship to sibling tools. Incomplete for a tool with many siblings and no output schema.

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 description does not explain parameters beyond showing output fields. Schema has some descriptions (date_from/date_to: 'YYYY-MM-DD', limit: min/max) but no descriptions for ticker or format. With low schema description coverage (as per context signals), the description should add parameter context but largely fails to.

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?

Description clearly states 'U.S. government contract awards for a single ticker', specifying verb (awards) and resource (government contracts), and implicitly distinguishes from sibling screener_government_contracts by mentioning single ticker. Lacks explicit exclusion of multi-ticker queries.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like screener_government_contracts or other per-ticker tools. The description does not mention prerequisites, suggested contexts, or when not to use.

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