fed_register_list_agencies

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden. It does not mention any behavioral traits such as being read-only, pagination behavior, rate limits, or what the output contains beyond slugs. The description is too minimal to inform the agent about side effects or constraints.

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 short sentences that immediately convey the core purpose and usage. There is no extraneous information, and the key information is front-loaded.

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 description covers the essential need for the tool (listing slugs for search) and provides a usage example. It does not document the optional `perPage` parameter or the output structure, but for a simple listing tool, the description is reasonably complete given the context of sibling tools.

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 input schema has one parameter (`perPage`) with 0% description coverage (no schema description). The tool description does not mention this parameter at all, leaving the agent without guidance on its purpose or valid values.

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 lists Federal Register agencies with slugs, and explicitly ties it to the need for `fed_register_search_documents`. It provides a concrete example query ('what's the FedReg slug for Veterans Affairs?'), making the purpose unmistakable and distinguishing it from sibling tools.

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 directly tells when to use the tool: to resolve slugs for agency listing, especially before searching documents. It gives a specific use case, which provides clear guidance on appropriate context.

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