usas_autocomplete_naics

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

No annotations provided; description mentions autocomplete behavior and anti-hallucination but lacks details on output format, rate limits, or error handling. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

Two concise sentences front-load purpose and key guard. No unnecessary words, highly efficient.

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 simple autocomplete tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, when to use, and a key safety feature. Missing output format but overall sufficient for the tool's complexity.

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 has 2 parameters with 0% description coverage. Description adds context for searchText (free-text) and limit (implied number of results) but does not fully explain limit or format requirements.

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?

Description clearly states 'Autocomplete NAICS codes by free-text' and provides an example. It distinguishes from sibling tools (e.g., usas_naics_hierarchy) by focusing on autocomplete, not hierarchy browsing.

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 says call this when user mentions a NAICS theme but no specific code, and includes an anti-hallucination guard. Does not explicitly state when not to use, but context is clear.

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