fed_register_get_document

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, indicating safe read-only behavior. The description adds value by listing specific fields returned (title, abstract, citation, etc.) and noting the raw_text_url for the full body, which helps the agent understand the output without needing an output schema.

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 a single sentence that efficiently conveys the purpose and key return fields, with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the action.

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 the simplicity of the tool (one parameter, read-only), the description adequately covers the key return fields and the availability of raw text via raw_text_url. No output schema exists, but the listed fields provide sufficient context for an agent to use the tool.

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 description coverage is 100% (the one parameter 'documentNumber' is described with an example). The description does not add any additional meaning beyond the schema's description of the 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 clearly states 'Fetch full detail for a Federal Register document by number', using a specific verb ('Fetch') and resource ('document'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'fed_register_search_documents' which lists documents, and 'fed_register_public_inspection' which shows pending documents.

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 implies when to use (when full details of a specific document are needed) by listing the return fields. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like 'fed_register_search_documents' for searching.

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