ofac_exports

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

The description adds little beyond the readOnlyHint annotation. It states the tool lists exports, which is consistent with a read operation, but does not describe any additional behavior (e.g., pagination, format details). With annotations covering safety, this meets the baseline but offers limited extra context.

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 a single, concise sentence with no filler. Every word adds meaning, and it is front-loaded with the action verb and object.

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 parameterless, read-only listing tool, the description completely conveys the tool's functionality. No output schema is present, but the description adequately communicates the return concept (a list of available exports and formats).

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 tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so the description does not need to explain parameter details. The baseline for 0-param tools is 4, and the description appropriately focuses on what the tool returns.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and clearly names the resource ('available OFAC sanctions data export files and formats'). It distinguishes this tool from sibling OFAC tools like 'ofac_search' or 'ofac_sdn_list' by focusing on discovering available exports rather than querying sanctions data.

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?

Purpose implies when to use: when you need to see available export files and their formats. While it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, the context is clear enough for an agent to select this over more specialized OFAC tools.

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