screener_government_contracts

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

No annotations provided. The description does not disclose if the tool is read-only, any side effects, rate limits, or authentication requirements. It only lists return fields.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the tool's purpose, and provides necessary detail without excess. Every sentence is useful.

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?

Despite lack of output schema, the description explains return values (rows and summary). The tool is simple with two parameters, and the description is mostly sufficient, though it could add usage context vs siblings.

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?

Input schema covers both parameters (limit and format) thoroughly. The description adds no additional semantics beyond what the schema provides. Baseline score for high schema coverage.

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 it screens U.S. government contract awards across all tickers, and lists the returned fields. It distinguishes from the sibling 'government_contracts_by_ticker' which is for individual tickers.

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 says 'across all tickers' implying no ticker filter, but does not explicitly state when to use vs alternatives like government_contracts_by_ticker or other screener tools. No guidance on 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.