usas_get_award_detail

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

The description goes beyond annotations by listing specific return fields (period_of_performance, base_and_all_options, set-aside type, etc.) and explaining that it returns what the search endpoint omits. 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?

The description is a single, well-structured sentence that conveys purpose, parameter source, and returned fields efficiently. No redundant 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 simple nature of the tool (one parameter, no output schema), the description is complete. It informs the agent what to expect in terms of return fields and parameter source.

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 single parameter is well-described in both schema and description. The description adds value by specifying the source tool and example format, though the schema already provides a clear description.

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 action ('Fetch full detail'), the specific resource ('single award'), and identifies the identifier ('generatedInternalId') with its source. It distinguishes itself from the sibling search tool by listing fields it returns that the search omits.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool (after usas_search_individual_awards to get full details). It does not explicitly say when not to use it or provide alternatives, but the context is clear.

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