fed_register_public_inspection

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds critical behavioral context: docs are pre-publication, no FR citation/page, may change/withdraw, returns leadDays and filing_type (special vs regular). No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Concisely front-loads the core concept (leading indicator, ~1-to-several days ahead). Each sentence serves a purpose: mode explanation, return fields, limitations, cross-references. No wasted words.

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, but description explains key return fields (leadDays, filing_type, agencies). It covers prerequisites (agency slugs via fed_register_list_agencies) and cautions on authoritative status. Complete for the tool's complexity and sibling context.

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 coverage is 100% so baseline is 3. The description adds significant meaning: explains modes in depth, conditionality of date, notes that date rides conditions[available_on], and describes specialOnly filter as a stronger signal. This goes beyond schema descriptions.

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 accesses Federal Register Public Inspection documents (filed but not yet published), a pre-publication leading indicator. It distinguishes three modes (current, date, search) and contrasts with the authoritative fed_register_get_document, ensuring the agent understands its unique role.

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?

Explicitly explains when to use the tool (for early signals before official publication) and when not to (do not treat as authoritative; may change/withdraw). Recommends cross-checking with fed_register_get_document after publication and references fed_register_list_agencies for agency-slug resolution.

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