get_reference_data

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It implies a read-only retrieval but does not explicitly state side effects, permissions, or response behavior beyond listing what each data_type returns. Adequate but not detailed.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose, then structured parameter details. Slightly verbose due to formal Args format, but every sentence adds value. No wasted words.

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?

Covers all data types and parameter conditions. Output schema exists, so return value details are not needed. Could mention that offense_type is ignored for non-offenses, but not essential.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description fully explains both parameters: data_type with four enumerated values and offense_type with conditional requirement. Adds significant meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 the tool retrieves reference data (state lists, offense/bias code lookups, data properties, refresh dates). The verb 'Get' and specific resource types distinguish it from sibling tools that focus on crime statistics.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on data_type options and conditionally required offense_type. However, no explicit comparison to siblings or when-not-to-use advice, though context makes it clear this is for reference data.

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