govinfo_bill_text

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is covered. The description adds substantial behavioral context: bill size ranges (5k to 500k+ chars), default max_length of 100k, preview_only behavior (returns metadata only), and version suffix meanings. This goes beyond annotations without contradicting them.

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?

Well-structured with a clear lead sentence, an IMPORTANT usage note, and a concise bullet-like list of version suffixes. Every sentence adds useful information; no filler or repetition. The length is justified by the tool's complexity.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description covers what is returned (full text or metadata with preview_only), character limits, version options, and the relationship to sibling tools. The tool has 6 parameters and the description addresses them all through a combination of text and 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 coverage is 100%, so parameters are already documented. The description adds value by explaining version suffix semantics in text (e.g., 'enr' = enrolled/signed), and elaborating max_length usage ('Most bills fit within 100k... Set higher for omnibus bills'). This enriches the bare schema definitions without redundancy.

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 states the tool retrieves the full legislative text of a bill from GovInfo, specifying the content type ('actual law language with section numbers, dollar amounts, legal citations, and provisions'). This is a specific verb+resource and clearly distinguishes it from congress_bill_summaries, which the description explicitly contrasts.

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?

Provides explicit guidance: try congress_bill_summaries first for quick CRS summaries, and use this tool only when exact language, provisions, or dollar amounts are needed. Additionally recommends preview_only=true first to check bill size. This is clear when-to-use and alternative guidance.

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