usas_search_agency_spending

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the description does not need to repeat safety traits. It adds the context that spending is aggregated by awarding agency, but does not disclose other behavioral details like pagination or response format. This is adequate given the 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 two sentences with no filler. It front-loads the core purpose and provides a concrete example. Every word earns its place.

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 and 4 undocumented parameters, the description provides insufficient context for correct invocation. The example only hints at one parameter (NAICS). An agent would need more information on required vs optional params, result format, and typical usage patterns.

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 only mentions 'NAICS' in the example. It does not explain any of the four parameters (limit, naics, setAside, fiscalYear), so the description fails to compensate for the missing schema documentation. The agent must infer parameter meanings from names alone.

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 tool returns spending broken down by awarding agency and gives a specific example query (NAICS 541512). This distinguishes it from siblings like usas_search_subagency_spending or usas_search_psc_spending, which break down by other dimensions.

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 a concrete use case ('which agencies spend the most on NAICS 541512') and implies this tool is for top-level agency aggregation. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the purpose is clear enough for an AI to select it over similar tools.

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