nonprofit_search_nonprofits_by_category

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

Discloses rate limit ('30/minute'), no authentication required, and NTEE code mapping beyond annotations. Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world; description adds non-contradictory behavioral details.

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?

Description is somewhat long but every sentence provides value. Information is front-loaded with primary purpose and output. Slightly verbose but not excessive.

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?

Output schema exists so description need not explain return format. Description covers return size (up to 25 results), specific fields (revenue, assets, health scores), rate limits, auth, and next steps. Complete for a search tool.

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?

Adds meaning beyond schema: category maps to specific NTEE categories and accepts raw NTEE letters. State parameter is explained as US state code. Schema coverage is 100% but description enhances understanding.

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?

Clearly states 'Search US nonprofits by mission category and state' with specific verbs and resources. Distinguishes from sibling tools like nonprofit_search_nonprofits_by_name and nonprofit_fetch_nonprofit_full_profile by mentioning follow-up usage.

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?

Explicitly provides usage context: 'Starting point for nonprofit due diligence — follow with nonprofit_fetch_nonprofit_full_profile for deep dive.' Also includes fallback instructions to call report_feedback if the tool doesn't meet the need.

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