cdc_places_health

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description aligns with 'Get county-level health indicators'. No contradictions. The description adds context about measures and returns crude prevalence, but behavioral traits are adequately covered by annotations.

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 efficiently structured with purpose first, then a detailed but necessary list of measures. It is not overly verbose, though the list is long.

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 complexity of available measures and no output schema, the description adequately explains the return format (crude prevalence by county). It is complete for a data query tool.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all three parameters. The description adds value by listing all possible measure IDs beyond what the schema's enum-like description provides, enhancing usability.

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 it retrieves county-level health indicators from CDC PLACES, listing many specific measures. It distinguishes from sibling tools like cdc_places_city, which focus on city-level data.

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 use for county health data but does not explicitly state when to choose this over alternatives like cdc_query or other CDC tools. No exclusions or comparative guidance provided.

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