dol_ui_claims_state

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, covering the safety profile. The description adds the 'weekly' time frequency and the specific metrics, which are useful but not extensive. It does not disclose behaviors like default limit, pagination, or response format, though these are partially covered by the schema descriptions. Given the annotations, a 3 is appropriate.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the main action and scope. No unnecessary words, and the key differentiator ('state-level') is stated first. 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?

For a read-only query tool with 5 optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose and available metrics. The schema handles parameter details. It lacks explicit mention of response shape or default behaviors like returning all states if no state is specified, but these are minor given the schema covers them. The description is nearly complete for its simplicity.

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 all parameters have descriptions. The tool description adds context about the data content (metrics) but does not elaborate on parameter behavior beyond what the schema provides. Since the schema already documents parameters thoroughly, the baseline of 3 applies.

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 state-level weekly UI claims and lists the key metrics (initial claims, continued claims, insured unemployment rate). It explicitly says 'across states,' distinguishing it from the national-level sibling dol_ui_claims_national without naming it. The verb 'Get' and resource are specific and unambiguous.

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 state-level comparison but does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives like dol_ui_claims_national. An agent could infer from 'state-level' that national data belongs elsewhere, but there is no direct guidance or exclusion statement.

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