List USAspending Toptier Agencies

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true. Description adds only 'no authentication required,' which is useful but minimal. Does not mention rate limits, pagination, or response size despite limit parameter.

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?

Two concise sentences: first states purpose and result, second states authentication requirement. No fluff, front-loaded with essential information.

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 simple list tool with no output schema, description covers core purpose and authentication. Lacks details on default sort order, data freshness (real-time vs cached), or how many agencies are typically returned. Sufficient for basic understanding but not fully complete.

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 has 2 parameters with 50% description coverage (response_format described, limit not). Tool description provides no parameter details, failing to compensate for undocumented limit parameter. Agents must infer limit usage from constraints alone.

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?

Description clearly states verb (list), resource (federal toptier agencies), and specific data fields (budgetary, obligation, outlay summary). Distinguishes from sibling autocomplete tool by focusing on listing all toptier agencies with summary fields.

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?

States 'no authentication required' but does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives like usaspending_autocomplete_agency or search tools. Implicitly, it's for getting an overview of all agencies, but lacks explicit comparison or exclusions.

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