get_summarized_crime_data

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

Describes the data content and default behavior (aggregate defaults to 'yearly'), but with no annotations, the description carries full burden. It does not disclose potential side effects, authentication needs, rate limits, or whether the operation is read-only, though it is implicitly a read operation.

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 moderately long but well-structured with a clear opening line and an Args list. Each sentence is informative and earned. Could be slightly more concise, but overall efficient.

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 7 parameters (4 required), no annotations, and an output schema, the description covers all parameter semantics, required conditions, and provides examples. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke the tool correctly, with no obvious gaps.

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 description coverage, the description adds extensive value by explaining each parameter's meaning, allowed values (e.g., offense codes, level options), required conditions (state for 'state' level, ORI for 'agency' level), and date format. This fully compensates for the schema's lack of descriptive metadata.

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 it gets summarized SRS crime data including specific metrics (offense rates, actuals, clearances, population coverage). The verb 'get' and resource 'summarized crime data' are specific, but it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like get_crime_trends or get_nibrs_data.

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 detailed parameter guidance (e.g., state required for 'state' level, ORI for 'agency' level, date format examples) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor when not to use it.

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