gsa_benchmark_labor_rates

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds critical behavioral details: returns distribution (min/median/max + escalated medians), match count saturation, and null totalAvailable for broad queries. No contradiction.

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 dense paragraph that front-loads purpose and then provides essential details. It is efficient but could be slightly more structured with bullet points for readability. Still, every sentence adds value.

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?

With no output schema, the description explains return distribution components (currentRate min/median/max + escalated medians). It covers key aspects like saturation and filtering, but could mention error states or define 'keyless' more clearly.

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%, baseline 3. The description adds semantic value by explaining education level uses short codes, business size filter meaning, and context like 'keyless' and saturation effect on results, raising the score above baseline.

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 verb 'benchmarks' and resource 'GSA CALC labor rates', specifying it returns a distribution not a single price. It distinguishes from any sibling by focusing on labor rates, a unique domain among the listed 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 provides explicit when-to-use guidance: rates are ceilling/catalog and fully burdened, warns against double-adding wrap, explains saturation at 10000 matches, and suggests filters to narrow queries. It covers both usage and limitations.

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