dol_ui_claims_state

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds context about the data fields and the ability to compare across states, which is useful, but it does not disclose any additional behavioral traits such as pagination behavior, data freshness, or sorting defaults beyond what the schema already explains.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the core action. The second sentence adds clarifying detail about the comparison functionality without any waste.

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?

For a read-only list tool with well-described parameters, the description provides enough context about what the tool does and what data is available. The absence of an output schema is mitigated by the description's mention of the specific claim types and the state-level scope, making the tool's purpose and invocation clear.

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?

All five parameters have descriptions in the schema (100% coverage), so the schema carries the burden of explaining limit, state, offset, sort_by, and sort_order. The description does not add any parameter-specific meaning beyond what is already in the schema.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Get state-level weekly Unemployment Insurance (UI) claims.' It clearly distinguishes from national-level counterparts by stating 'state-level' and lists the exact metrics (initial claims, continued claims, insured unemployment rate) that can be compared.

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 implies usage for state-level comparisons and contrasts with tools like dol_ui_claims_national without naming it. It provides clear context (state-level vs. national) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative tools.

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