state_query

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already discloses the safe read nature. The description adds meaningful context: universal state coverage, no dependency on category mappings, and full SoQL support. It does not contradict annotations and provides useful behavior details beyond the structured data.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose. Each sentence adds distinct value: what it does, scope flexibility, how to source dataset IDs, and SoQL capability. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 moderate-complexity query tool with no output schema, the description covers key context: purpose, universal state applicability, dataset ID discovery, and supported SoQL features. It lacks explicit return format or examples, but those are not essential given the schema richness and read-only nature.

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 well-documented. The description lists SoQL parameters ($select, $where, etc.) as a group, reinforcing that they follow SoQL syntax, but does not add much meaning beyond the schema's per-parameter descriptions. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Query any state's Socrata open data dataset by its 4-character ID', which is a specific verb+resource+method. It also differentiates from sibling state_* tools by emphasizing it works for ANY state even without category mappings, making it the generic Socrata query tool among specialized siblings.

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 when to use this tool: when you have a 4-character dataset ID and want to query arbitrary Socrata data. It also explains how to find dataset IDs by browsing state portals, which is actionable guidance. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or provide when-not-to-use exclusions, so it falls short of a 5.

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