ofac_filter

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already covers safety, and the description adds meaningful behavioral context by specifying 'substring match' and the requirement for at least one filter. However, it does not disclose what happens when no filter is provided, how multiple filters combine, or return format/pagination, so the additional transparency is limited.

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 exactly two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and resource, and contains no extraneous words. Every clause 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?

For a simple filter with four optional parameters and no output schema, the description conveys the core purpose, filter dimensions, matching behavior, and a hard usage requirement. Minor gaps such as how multiple filters are combined (AND/OR) and what happens without any filter are not explicitly stated, but overall it is adequately complete.

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 descriptions cover all parameters at 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by explaining that matching is substring-based, which applies to all filter parameters and is not evident from the schema alone.

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 explicitly states the action ('Filter'), the resource ('OFAC SDN list'), and the scope ('by program, entity type, or country'), which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like ofac_sdn_list. The 'substring match' note adds further precision.

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 clearly implies the tool is for filtering a subset of the SDN list, and the requirement 'At least one filter parameter should be provided' gives direct usage guidance. However, it does not explicitly contrast with siblings (e.g., when to use ofac_sdn_list instead), so it falls short of an explicit alternatives comparison.

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