getSenateNetWorthAggregated

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that: it does not explain what 'aggregated' means (time period, asset categories, granularity) or what the returned figures represent.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the verb first. The trailing 'with the FMP Senate Net Worth Aggregated API' is somewhat redundant filler, but the description is not bloated.

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 one-parameter read tool with no output schema and full annotation coverage, the description is minimally adequate. It nevertheless omits any explanation of the aggregation semantics and gives no basis for choosing it over the sibling getSenateNetWorth, which is the one thing an agent most needs here.

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 100% — senateID is documented in the schema with a format example (e.g., P000197). The description adds no further meaning about the identifier, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 names a specific verb and resource ('Retrieve aggregated net worth figures of a member of Congress'), and the word 'aggregated' hints at a summarized view. However, it never distinguishes itself from the sibling getSenateNetWorth, so an agent cannot tell from the description alone which of the two net-worth endpoints to pick.

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?

There is no when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative routing guidance, even though the sibling list contains getSenateNetWorth, getSenatePositions, and getSenateProfile that an agent could confuse this with. The only clue is the word 'aggregated' in the title, which is left unexplained.

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