bea_gdp_by_state

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, indicating safe read operation. The description does not add behavioral context beyond stating it 'gets' data, which is consistent with read-only. No mention of rate limits, authentication, or data freshness, but annotations cover the key aspect.

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 extremely concise at three sentences, with the purpose stated first, followed by a bullet-like list for table options and GeoFips. No fluff; every sentence adds specific value.

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 tool's moderate complexity (4 parameters, no output schema), the description adequately covers the main options and geography format. However, it lacks details about the response structure or any caveats, and does not mention defaults (though schema covers them). Minor gap for completeness.

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 coverage is 100% with parameter descriptions, but the description adds value by explaining table option codes and GeoFips format with examples (e.g., '06000' for CA). This goes beyond the schema alone, providing useful context for selecting parameter values.

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 retrieves gross domestic product for U.S. states from BEA Regional data. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like bea_gdp_national and bea_gdp_by_industry by specifying state-level focus and mentioning specific table options.

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 implies the tool is for state GDP queries but does not explicitly compare to alternatives (e.g., when to use bea_gdp_national instead). It provides context on table options and GeoFips but lacks guidance on tool selection among siblings.

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