lookup_by_district

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

The description mentions 'skipping geocoding' but does not disclose other behavioral traits like read-only status, required permissions, or potential errors. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden, and it is insufficient.

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 extremely concise (two sentences) and front-loaded with the main purpose. Every sentence adds value; no wasted words.

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 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description provides key information but lacks details on return format, error cases, and clear usage context relative to siblings.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description adds critical meaning by explaining the valid values for chamber and noting that district is optional. However, it does not explain the state parameter or district format.

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 returns officials for a chamber and district, and specifies valid chamber values (senate|house for federal, upper|lower for state). However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like lookup_officials or get_official_details.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The phrase 'skipping geocoding' hints at a use case but does not clearly explain when to choose this over lookup_officials or list_districts.

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