nonprofit_search_nonprofits_by_category

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses rate limit (30/minute), no auth required, use of ProPublica API, and the mapping of category to NTEE codes. It also mentions the feedback mechanism for inadequate responses, providing comprehensive behavioral 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 relatively concise (3-4 sentences) and front-loads the main purpose. Each sentence contributes useful information, though the structure could be slightly more organized.

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?

Given the tool's low complexity (2 parameters, 1 required) and presence of an output schema, the description covers all necessary context: purpose, parameter semantics, behavior, limitations (rate limit), and fallback. It is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains category maps to NTEE codes (both named categories and raw letters), adding significant meaning beyond the schema. However, the state parameter is only mentioned as a filter without clarifying its format (e.g., two-letter code) or its optional nature with default null, which the schema already specifies. Slight gap but overall adds value.

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 clearly states the tool searches US nonprofits by mission category and state, returning up to 25 results with revenue, assets, and health scores. It differentiates from siblings like nonprofit_search_nonprofits_by_name and nonprofit_fetch_nonprofit_full_profile by positioning itself as a starting point for due diligence.

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 advises following up with nonprofit_fetch_nonprofit_full_profile for deep dive on a specific EIN, and provides a fallback via report_feedback if the tool does not meet the user's need. This gives clear guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives.

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