Search FDIC Institutions

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

Annotations already declare the tool as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, so the bar is lower. The description adds context about pagination and a schema reference for the full field catalog, but does not disclose additional behavioral traits beyond what annotations provide.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the use case, and no wasted words. The first sentence tells when to use it, the second describes what it returns and references the field catalog. Highly 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 the comprehensive schema with detailed parameter descriptions and annotations, the description adequately covers the tool's functionality. It mentions pagination and a field catalog reference, and lists the searchable criteria. Could potentially mention error handling or rate limits, but overall complete for its complexity.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description itself does not elaborate on parameters beyond the schema; it only sets the overall use context. The schema already provides detailed descriptions for all 6 parameters.

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's purpose: searching FDIC-insured institutions by various criteria like name, state, CERT, asset size, charter class, or regulatory status. It distinguishes itself from over 20 sibling tools by explicitly specifying use case and return type (institution profile rows with pagination).

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?

The description begins with 'Use this when the user needs...', providing clear context for when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or suggest alternative sibling tools (e.g., fdic_get_institution for a single institution), lacking explicit exclusions.

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