Open Census MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the topical coverage domain through the 9 enumerated topics, but omits mutation characteristics, caching behavior, or return format details that would be necessary for full transparency.

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?

Excellent structure with purpose front-loaded, followed by usage priority, scannable bulleted taxonomy of topics, and tactical closing advice. No wasted words; every sentence provides actionable guidance.

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 2-parameter lookup tool without output schema, the description adequately covers scope through the topic taxonomy and workflow positioning. A brief description of return value format would elevate this to a 5.

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?

While schema coverage is 100% (baseline 3), the description significantly enriches the 'topics' parameter by enumerating 9 specific valid values with semantic descriptions (e.g., 'small_area: Population thresholds...'). However, it completely omits discussion of the 'domain' parameter.

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 opens with a specific verb-resource pair ('Query statistical methodology guidance') and explicitly positions the tool as the first step ('Call this FIRST') to distinguish it from sibling data retrieval tools like get_census_data.

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?

Provides explicit workflow guidance ('Call this FIRST for every query to ground your orientation') and parameter strategy ('When in doubt, request more topics rather than fewer'). Lacks explicit 'when not to use' or named sibling alternatives, preventing a 5.

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