cdc_death_rates_historical

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already indicates safe read-only behavior, and the description adds context about age-adjustment and historical scope. However, it does not disclose data source, update frequency, or return format beyond what is implied.

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, no filler. The first sentence clearly states the purpose, and the second provides a concise cause list and a usage hint. 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 tool's simplicity and full schema coverage, the description is nearly complete. It lacks mention of output format or data source, but the context of historical death rates and trend analysis is well covered.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description lists the cause enum and implies year ranges, but adds no detail beyond what the schema provides. Parameter semantics are adequate but not enriched.

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 age-adjusted death rates for major causes since 1900, with a specific verb and resource. It lists the exact causes and highlights the 120+ year data range, distinguishing it from siblings like cdc_mortality_rates or cdc_causes_of_death.

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 usage for long-term trend analysis but gives no explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives. It's helpful but lacks guidance on when to choose this over other CDC tools.

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