congress_committee_details

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

Description adds context beyond the readOnlyHint annotation by detailing what is returned (history, subcommittees, etc.). No contradiction with 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?

Two sentences: first sentence states purpose, second lists outputs. Efficient but could be more concise. No wasted words, but could integrate a bit.

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 no output schema, the description adequately explains return content (history, website, subcommittees, counts, communications). Missing pagination info but acceptable for a detail endpoint.

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 covers both parameters with descriptions and example for committee_code, so the description adds no extra parameter meaning. Coverage is 100%, so baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves detailed info about a congressional committee by chamber and committee code, and lists specific outputs (history, website, subcommittees, counts, communications). It's specific but doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like congress_committee_full_profile or congress_committee_bills.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Does not mention prerequisites or when to choose this over other committee tools.

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