epa_toxic_releases

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is known. The description adds context about TRI tracking but does not disclose behavioral traits beyond what annotations provide (e.g., no mention of rate limits, data freshness, or result structure). The added information is useful but not behavioral.

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 concise with four sentences, each adding value: purpose, explanation of TRI, list of common sectors, and cross-references. No wasted words, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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?

The description is adequate for a simple data retrieval tool with three parameters and no output schema. It provides context about sectors and cross-referencing, but does not explain the structure of returned data (e.g., chemical names, amounts, years). More detail on output would improve 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 description coverage is 100%, so parameters are well-documented. The description mentions 'by state' and lists common sectors, but those are not parameters. It does not add significant meaning beyond the schema descriptions for state, county, and rows.

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 'Get Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) data by state,' explaining what TRI is and listing common industrial sectors. It distinguishes from sibling tools by specifically targeting TRI data and even suggests cross-referencing with epa_facilities and epa_greenhouse_gas for other aspects.

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 TRI data retrieval but does not explicitly contrast with other EPA tools like epa_enforcement or epa_rcra. It provides cross-reference hints but lacks clear when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. No prerequisites or limitations are mentioned.

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