fema_public_assistance

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is clear. Description adds that it shows 'project-level grants' and covers specific disaster types, which is useful but limited. No mention of pagination, limits, or other behavioral traits beyond the schema.

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, front-loaded with the main action. Every word is informative with no redundancy. Efficient and directly conveys the purpose.

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 list tool with 4 parameters and no output schema, the description adequately explains the type of data returned and the intended use. It covers the core aspects, though it could briefly mention how results are ordered or truncated.

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 has 100% parameter description coverage, so the baseline is 3. Description does not add additional meaning to the parameters (disaster_number, state, top, skip). The contextual info about grant types does not directly aid parameter understanding.

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 'Get FEMA Public Assistance (PA) grant awards' with specific action and resource, and elaborates on the scope (project-level grants, types of recipients and work). It distinguishes itself from siblings like fema_disaster_declarations and fema_housing_assistance by focusing on PA grants.

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 alternative FEMA tools. Sibling tools such as fema_disaster_declarations and fema_housing_assistance exist but are not mentioned or contrasted. The description provides no when-not-to-use or context for selection.

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