usas_search_federal_account_spending

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It does not mention behavioral traits like required parameters, pagination, rate limits, or what happens with no results. Only implies a search operation.

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, no fluff, but lacks necessary details about parameters and usage. Conciseness is good but at the expense of completeness.

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 4 parameters, no output schema, no annotations, and high sibling similarity, the description is far from complete. It does not explain inputs, outputs, or constraints.

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 4 parameters with 0% description coverage. Description mentions TAS but does not map to any parameter or clarify how to use parameters like agency, naics, fiscalYear, limit. Fails to compensate for missing schema descriptions.

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 it's for spending broken down by federal account/TAS, distinguishing it from sibling tools like usas_search_agency_spending. Provides an example (e.g., '036-0167 = Information Technology Systems, VA').

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?

Says 'Use to map money to the actual budget line item,' giving a specific use case, but does not explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives. With many similar sibling tools, more explicit guidance would help.

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