fr_agencies

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. The description adds value by specifying the exact return fields (names, short names, slugs, URLs) and the volume (470+ agencies), which goes beyond the annotation's safety profile.

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 extremely concise, using only two sentences to convey all essential information. It is front-loaded with the primary action and purpose, followed by return details and scale. No wasted words.

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 tool with no input parameters and a single output of a list, the description is fully complete. It explains what the tool does, what it returns, and the approximate size. No output schema is needed for this straightforward listing.

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?

No parameters exist in the input schema, so the description does not need to add parameter meaning. Baseline of 4 applies as the description is clear and no parameter information is missing.

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 it lists all federal agencies that publish in the Federal Register, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like fr_search_rules or fr_document_detail by focusing on agency enumeration.

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 when needing a list of agencies for filtering, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives or any prerequisites. No direct exclusion criteria or context for when not to use it.

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