fdic_deposits

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already declares this as a safe read operation. The description adds useful context on data source (annual survey, June 30) and branch-level scope, which goes beyond the annotation's minimal safety signal. No mention of pagination internals, but that is not critical given the read-only nature.

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?

Four short, focused sentences. Each sentence adds distinct value: what it returns, data source, filtering ability, and use cases. No redundant or fill language.

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 dataset query, the description conveys the nature of the data (branch deposits), relevant filters, and likely use cases. No output schema exists, but the description mentions 'deposit amounts at each bank branch,' which suffices for basic understanding. Minor gaps include pagination defaults, but those are already covered in the schema.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description's 'Filter by state or institution' merely paraphrases the schema's filter examples and adds no new meaning. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schemas carry the parameter documentation burden.

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's purpose: 'Get Summary of Deposits' with branch-level deposit data from an annual survey, showing deposit amounts per branch. It distinguishes itself from FDIC sibling tools (e.g., fdic_search_institutions, fdic_financials) by emphasizing branch-level granularity.

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 clear usage context: 'Useful for market share analysis and banking access by geography.' It also states filters by state or institution. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool, so it falls short of full guidance.

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