usas_glossary

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It describes the tool as a glossary lookup for definition confirmation. While it doesn't detail behavior like exact matching or default behavior, the core functionality is clear.

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 sentences, front-loaded with purpose and concrete examples. No unnecessary words. Efficiently conveys when and how to use.

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?

The tool is simple, but the description omits parameter explanations. Given the presence of two optional parameters, the description should at least hint at their roles. Otherwise, the purpose and usage are adequately covered.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain what 'search' or 'limit' parameters do. An agent would need to infer that 'search' is the term to look up and 'limit' controls result count, but this is not stated.

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 'USAspending glossary of 151 federal-spending terms' and provides specific use examples like 'what's a TAS?'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools which are all about data queries and searches, not definitions.

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 'Use to confirm terminology before answering compliance/budget questions', giving a clear context. Lacks explicit 'when not to use', but the purpose is specific enough to differentiate.

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