fbi_expanded_homicide

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

The description aligns with annotations (readOnlyHint: true) by stating 'Get... data,' implying a read operation. It adds context on the data content (demographics, weapons, circumstances) but does not disclose rate limits, authentication, or response structure. The annotations already cover the read-only nature, so the contribution is moderate.

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 two sentences, highly concise, and front-loaded with the primary action. No wasted words; every sentence adds value.

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?

Despite 5 parameters (state, ori, type, from_year, to_year), the description omits any mention of time-range or data-type selection. It does not explain how to request national-level data (no params?) or agency-level via ORI. An agent may fail to correctly invoke the tool without this context.

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 coverage is 100%, so the description does not need to repeat parameter details. The description adds high-level context (e.g., national/state/agency levels) but does not elaborate on how parameters correspond to these levels or explain the 'type' parameter. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema provides full definitions.

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 'expanded homicide (Supplementary Homicide Report) data from the FBI' and lists specific data fields (victim/offender demographics, weapons, circumstances). This uniquely identifies the tool among siblings like fbi_arrest_data or fbi_crime_summarized.

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 mentions availability at 'national, state, or agency level' but provides no guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. An agent would not know when to prefer this over other FBI crime data tools.

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