census_query

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already communicates the read-only nature. The description adds context by stating that it returns data for specified variables and geography, and it names supported datasets. It does not disclose response format, pagination, rate limits, or error behavior, which would add further transparency.

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 compact and front-loaded: the first sentence states the core purpose, and the following list supplies high-value examples without unnecessary filler. It is not as minimal as a two-sentence high benchmark, but every sentence 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, the description only minimally states that data is returned for specified variables and geography; it does not clarify the response structure or limits. It does provide enough setup for common queries, but an agent might still be uncertain about multi-geography filters or output parsing for this complex API.

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 input schema already provides descriptions and examples for all parameters, giving 100% coverage. The description adds valuable domain-specific examples like '2023/acs/acs1' and 'B01001_001E' that go beyond the schema, helping the agent select valid dataset paths and variable codes.

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 identifies the tool's resource (U.S. Census Bureau Data API) and action ('Query'), and lists supported datasets and example variable codes, making the purpose concrete. However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools like census_population or census_search_variables, so it stops short of a 5.

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 practical usage hints through common dataset paths and variable examples, implying this is the general-purpose Census query tool. It does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it, so the guidance remains only implicit.

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