usas_get_agency_profile

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool returns mission, abbreviation, website, subtier_agency_count, and congressional_justification_url. It does not mention side effects or error handling, but for a read-only lookup this is adequate.

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 plus a list of return fields. It is front-loaded with the action and highly concise, with no extraneous information.

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 tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description covers the inputs and outputs adequately. The list of return fields provides sufficient context, though some terms like subtier_agency_count could be elaborated. Overall, it is complete for the functional scope.

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% (toptierCode has a description). The description adds little beyond the schema, restating the format and source. Baseline 3 applies per rules when schema coverage exceeds 80%.

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 it gets a full agency profile by toptier code. It specifies the code format (3-4 digits) and indicates the source (usas_lookup_agency). It lists the return fields, distinguishing it from siblings like usas_lookup_agency or usas_get_agency_awards_summary.

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 implicitly advises to first use usas_lookup_agency to obtain the code. It does not explicitly state when to use or not use this tool, but the context of needing a toptier code is clear. No direct alternatives exist among siblings for this specific profile.

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